TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1257
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from the mines to their factory which was covered under the category of Goods Transport Agency (GTA) under Section 65(105)(zzp) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 65(50b) ibid. It is also their case that as per sub-rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, the person liable for paying Service Tax on the transportation service provided by a GTA in cases where the consignor or consignee of goods falls under any of the seven sub-clauses under the said sub-rule, is the person who pays or is liable to pay freight for the transportation of such goods, which in the instant case having been made by the assessee, therefore, the assessee was liable to pay Service Tax. 1.2 It appears that the assessee furnished the details of freight ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s released on individual transporters, containing specification of the transport vehicle to be used, the distance to be covered and the rate of transportation which was payable on per tonne basis. • The rate of transportation as of above released varied between Rs.20/- per M.T. to Rs.31/- per M.T., depending on the distance to be covered and in any case, the maximum transportation charges payable per trip was Rs.558/- only. • In terms of Notification No. 34/2004-S.T. dated 03.12.2004 is applicable only for goods transport vehicles used by goods transport agencies (GTA) whereas the transporters who were involved in the case on hand are not the GTA but the owners of the vehicles used. • GTA is applicable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....relied on the following decisions / orders: - i. Commissioner of C.Ex. v. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Co. Ltd. [2009 (240) E.L.T. 661 (S.C.)] ii. Maruti Suzuki Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III [2009 (240) E.L.T. 641 (S.C.)] iii. Ispat Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.Ex., Raigad [2006 (199) E.L.T. 509 (Tri. - Mum.)] iv. NRC Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.Ex., Thane-I [2007 (209) E.L.T. 22 (Tri. - Del.)] v. Chemicals & Fibres of India Ltd. v. Collector of C.Ex., Bombay [1988 (33) E.L.T. 551 (Tri.)] vi. Akbar Badruddin Jiwani v. Collector of Cus. [1990 (47) E.L.T. 161 (S.C.)] vii. Secretary, Town Hall Committee v. Commissioner of C.Ex., Mysore [2007 (8) S.T.R. 170 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther the payment of freight attracted Service Tax levy under GTA, as confirmed in the impugned order? 8.1 The Ld. Consultant would submit, at the outset, that the transportation of limestone was undertaken by transport operators who were actually the owners of such trucks, with whom the appellant had directly entered into contract for transportation, such transport operators were not covered by the definition of GTA and hence, the appellant entertained a bona fide doubt that there was no liability to pay Service tax on the freights that were paid directly to such transport operators / truck owners. 8.2 Further, he would submit that such truck owners also did not issue any consignment note, which is also an essential ingredient of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0) G.S.T.L. 80 (Tri. - Mum.)] xi. South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.Ex., Raipur [2016 (41) S.T.R. 636 (Tri. - Del.)] 9. Per contra, the Ld. Assistant Commissioner relied on the findings in the impugned order. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and we have perused the order of the lower authority. 11.1 In the case of M/s. K.M.B. Granites Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.Ex., Salem [2010 (19) S.T.R. 437 (Tri. - Chennai)] this Bench had an occasion to consider an almost similar issue of liability to Service Tax on services of GTA vis-à-vis Rule 2(1)(d)(v) ibid. After hearing both sides, this Bench has held as under: - "3. Heard both sides. It has been consistently contested by the assessee....