TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1282
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Jindal Stainless Limited (JSL). 3. The transactions undertaken by the Appellant during the period under dispute can be divided into two categories: Period - April 2012 to December 2014 3.1. During the period April 2012 to December 2014, M/s. SSTAPL was engaged by M/s. JSL for providing transportation services to M/s. JSL. M/s. SSTAPL, on whom work order was placed by M/s. JSL, outsourced the said service from the Appellant, by placing separate work orders stipulating the terms and conditions there in. The Work orders placed by M/s. SSTAPL to the Appellant was meant for 'Rake handling at Sukinda Railway station & Transportation of the same material from Sukinda railway siding to Jindal Stainless Limited at KNIC, Duburi, Orissa. 3.2. After successful completion of the job and necessary certification by M/s. JSL, the Appellant raised invoices on M/s. SSTAPL for "Transportation and Unloading of Coal from Sukinda Railway Siding to JSL, KNIC". The Appellant did not issue any 'Consignment Note' in the name of the consignee M/s. JSL. After loading of the goods into the Rakes, consignment notes containing all the necessary particulars were issued by M/s. SSTAPL in the name of M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rvice and not for Cargo handling service. 6. In support of their claim. the Appellant relied on the Board Circular No. 104/07/2008-S.T. dated 6-8-2008, wherein it has been clarified as under: "3. Issue: GTA provides service to a person in relation to transportation of goods by road in a goods carriage. The service provided is a single composite service which may include various intermediary and ancillary services such as loading/unloading, packing/unpacking, transshipment, temporary warehousing. For the service provided, GTA issues a consignment note and the invoice issued by the GTA for providing the said service includes the value of intermediary and ancillary services. In such a case, whether the intermediary or ancillary activities is to be treated as part of GTA service and the abatement should be extended to the charges for such intermediary or ancillary service? Clarification: GTA provides a service in relation to transportation of goods by road which is a single composite service. GTA also issues consignment note. The composite service may include various intermediate and ancillary services provided in relation to the principal service of the road transport of goods. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(7) GSTL 352 (Tri.-Del) as affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2018 (18) GSTL J172 (SC) Maa Kalika Transport Private Limited v. Commissioner 2023 (8) Centax 273 (Tri.- Cal) Commissioner v. Arvind Singh Lal Singh 2017 (48) STR 63 (Tri.-Del) Gulshan Verma v. Commissioner 2017 (5) GSTL 47 (Tri.-Chan) Khandelwal Transport v. Commissioner 2019 (22) GSTL 102 (Tri.-Mum) CCE Ranchi v. HEC Ltd. 2018 (9) GSTL 403 (Tri.-Kolkata) 9. Accordingly, by relying on the Board Circulars and the decisions cited above, they submitted that the Work Orders issued to the Appellant are essentially meant for transportation of goods and other activities are naturally bundled along with this principal service. Once the services rendered are classified as GTA Service, the liability of payment of service tax on these services was not on the Appellant, but on the service recipient. In the present case, it is an undisputed fact that the service recipient has duly discharged the Service tax as applicable thereon. Thus, the demand confirmed vide the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 10. The Appellant further submits that in respect of the services provided to SSTAPL, it is evident from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned order is liable to be set aside for this reason as well. Thus, once the departmental authorities have accepted the payment made and raised no dispute thereon, subsequent liability on the said value of services at the end of the Appellant tantamounts to double tax, which is grossly untenable. Reliance in this regard is placed on Shokat Ali v. Commissioner 2019 (28) GSTL 63 (Tri.-Del).The impugned order is liable to be set aside for this reason as well. 14. The Appellant also stated that the demand computed on the basis of Form 26AS is grossly untenable in as much as it considers receipts and is not based on the value of services provided, which is taxable under Service tax. The impugned order is liable to be set aside on this ground as well. 15. The Appellant further stated that extended period of limitation is not invocable in this case. They submitted that audit of the Appellant was duly conducted by the authorities for the FY 2012-13 to 2013-14 and concluded vide Audit report dated July 27, 2015, wherein the issue in dispute was not raised. Thereafter, the CPU authorities undertook investigation took a different view by classifying the impugned services under cargo handling....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me by P.Loader at railway siding and release of wagons without any wharfage or demurrage and loading of trucks at siding. Transportation of material to the pre-designated area of JSL plant at KNIC, Duburi after weighment at JSL Weigh bridge and unloading at such specified area in proper stacks/heaps/bins as directed by JSL. Covering the loaded trucks with Tarpaulin, proper tyeing at all corners so as to avoid any en-route pollution and spillage, compliance for obtaining and submission of road permit, undertaking required liasioning with local public enroute to ensure smooth movement of cargo, maintain proper record of trucks loaded and unloaded at JSL site. The contract value is on per metric tonne basis. Service tax thereon is liable to be paid by JSL. The bills were to be submitted rake wise on fortnightly basis. The Appellant has to enclose consignment note of SSTAPL for making entry of the trucks carrying cargo into JSL premises. 21. A perusal of the nature of the work performed by the Appellant to SSTAPL, as per the Work Order details referred above reveals that it is primarily transportation of the material from Sukinda railway siding to Jindal Stainless Limited at K....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reverse charge was duly discharged by M/s. JSL on the GTA service. 24. We observe that the Work order No. JSL/OPN/TRTP/LNT/DEC/1/2014-15 dated 02.12.2014, issued by M/s JSL to the Appellant stipulates the scope of work as handling with transportation of inward and outward rake cargo from Sukinda and Jakhapura railway sidings to JSL plant and vice versa. The said scope encapsulates as follows: Proper coordination with railway authorities/JSL Executives to get prior intimation about inward and outward rakes for JSL, receive rake placement memo and submit the same for loading/unloading/cargo shifting, collection of RR, rake/wagon unloading/loading work, remove material from railway track. Depute sufficient number of vehicles and transport the inward / outward rate cargo from JSL railway siding to JSL plant site or vice versa including loading and unloading of vehicles at both ends, cover vehicle for rake cargo transportation properly to ensure no en-route theft and pilferage. Undertake safety and security norms, immediate reconciliation of vehicles after shifting completion of every rake, compliance for obtaining and submission of road permit. The contract charges are bifurc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the invoice issued by the GTA, and not by any other person, such services would form part of GTA service and, therefore, the abatement of 70%, presently applicable to GTA service, would be available on it." 27. We observe that the clarifications cited above clearly establishes that when a composite contract is entered into between parties for transportation service including various intermediate or ancillary services provided in relation to the principal service of road transport of goods such as loading/unloading, packing/unpacking, transhipment etc., which are provided in the course of transportation, such contract cannot be vivisected. It will be treated as a contract for transportation only as the other services are naturally bundled together with the principal service of transportation. 28. The Appellant has relied upon various decisions in support of their contention that a single contract cannot be vivisected for the purpose of demanding service tax. We find that the decisions cited by the Appellant supports their case. 29. Another point raised in the impugned order is that separate charges have been given for the GTA service and other facilitation works performed by....