AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1195
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cussed supra. (ii) I confirm the demand of interest at appropriate rate against the said M/s Pranish Carriers LLP, G41, Sector-39, Noida (UP) on the confirmed amount of service Tax mentioned at the A (1) above under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 as discussed supra, (iii) I impose a penalty of Rs. 1,77,97,667/- (Rs. One Crore Seventy Seven Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Seven only) on the confirmed demand at the A(i) above, upon the said M/s Pranish Carriers LLP, G-41. Sector-39, Noida (UP)under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 for willful contravention of various statutory provisions with the intent to evade the payment of service taxas discussed supra; (iv) I impose penalty of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand only) under Section 77(1) (a) of the Finance Act, 1994 upon M/s Pranish Carriers LLP, G-41, Sector-39, Noida (UP) as discussed supra. B. Statement of Demand issued vide C. No. V(15)Adj./Noida/CGST/Pranish/06/2019/1882 dated 23.04.2019 for the period April, 2016 to June, 2017: (i) I confirm the demand of the Service Tax amounting to Rs. 2,67,22,126/- (inclusive of all Cesses) (Rs. Two Crores Sixty Seven Lakhs Twent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rvice Tax, Dhanbad Vs M/s Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., M/s Eastern Coalfield Ltd. 2022 (9) TMI 435-CESTAT-Kolkata, following has been held:- "5. We find that the issue is no longer res-integra inasmuch as the same has been decided by this Tribunal in the case of South Eastern Coalfields Limited vs. Commr, C. EX, Raipur 2017(47) S.T.R. 93 (Tri.- Del), wherein it has been held that the transportation services cannot be classified under GTA services where the consignment notes are not issued by the transporters. Further, the issue has also been examined in detail in the case of Mahanadi Coalfields Limited Vs. Commr, C. EX & S.T., BBSR-1 2022 (57) G.S.T.L. 242 (Tri. - Kolkata). The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced herein below: "12. We also find that the same view has been consistently followed by the co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal, the decisions which have been admitted for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Revenue Appeals. We note that though the matter is pending before the Apex Court, the aforesaid Tribunal decisions have not been stayed and therefore, we do not find any reason to take a contrary view. In so far as the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of Inox (Clause 2); c. INOXAP had the right to mopunt either new or old VITT's. The decision to install or Uninstall any tank on any lorry chassis was with INOXAP. d. The Appellant is responsible to make the payment of toll charges, octroi expenses and any other state and Inter-state duties/taxes during every trip of transporting the product (Clause 6); e. The Appellant shall always maintain its Lorry Chassis in goods roadworthy conditions so that it can render smooth and uninterrupted transport services (Clause 8.I); f. The Appellant is also responsible to insure the Lorry Chassis, drivers, other cabin crew and other employees/agents engaged for transportation Clause 8. VI); g. The Appellant is required to ensure that each Lorry Chassis is equipped with registration book, Valid Pollution Control (PUC) certificate, road and other tax certificates and with all valid and subsisting permits from respective transport/road authorities and also valid driving license of the Lorry Chassis driver required for authorized road movement (Clause 8.VIII); h. The Appellant shall keep the Lorry Chassis registered in its name with the concerne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rements like provident fund, ESIC etc for the drivers and cleaners engaged by them for running the Lorry Chassis (Clause 18). t. Agreement is subject too the provisions of Carriers Act, (Clause 23) 4.5 Relevant Provisions of the Carrier Act, 2007 are reproduced below: "Section 2 Definitions: In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-- (a) "common carrier" means a person engaged in the business of collecting, storing, forwarding or distributing goods to be carried by goods carriages under a goods receipt or transporting for hire of goods from place to place by motorised transport on road, for all persons undiscriminatingly and includes a goods booking company, contractor, agent, broker and courier agency engaged in the door-to-door transportation of documents, goods or articles utilising the services of a person, either directly or indirectly, to carry or accompany such documents, goods or articles, but does not include the Government; (b) "consignee" means the person named as consignee in the goods forwarding note; (c) "consignment" means documents, goods or articles entrusted by the consignor to the common ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ayable in accordance with sub-section (1) or section 11: Provided further that the common carrier shall not be liable if such carrier proves that such loss of, or damage to, the consignment or delay in delivery thereof, had not taken place due to his fault or neglect or that of his servants or agents thereof. From the above referred clauses of the agreement dated 23.07.2010, and the provisions of the Carrier Act, and the fact that the appellant was issuing the consignment notes for the transportation of these gases cleared by the INOXAP, we are firmly of the view that the agreement/ transaction between the appellant and his client was of the good transport by road, and the services so provided will be classified under the category of Good Transport Agency Service (Section 65 (105)(zzp) read with Section 65 (50b) of Finance Act, 1994 (pre amendments made by the Finance Act, 2012 and Section 65B (26) post amendments made in 2012). 4.6 Further, in the case of Shripad Concrete Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Surat-I 2023 (8) TMI 707- CESTAT Ahmedabad, the issue has been examined both for pre-negative list period and post-negative list period....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons regarding diversion/unloading of the material, so that setting of the material is avoided. In case of setting of the material is bowl unit for the above reasons, the cost of removing the material will be borne by the company. But in case delay is on account of transit time due to fault of driver then cost of removing the material from bowl will the borne by you. 32. Your drivers and cleaners/helpers shall take all precautions to ensure that the material loaded in the Bowl is delivered at the customers' sites in good condition. In case of any loss due to improper conduct by your people the loss shall be recovered from your bills at the rate of Rs. 3000.00 per cum. 36. Receipts of Goods : You will issue consignment notes for all loads and obtain proper receipts from the customers after the goods are delivered. You shall provide us the copies of consignment notes and of customer acknowledgements and also submit reports to us in the formats supplied by us at the required intervals." (emphasis supplied) 13. The basic terms remain the same for the second and third work orders, except for a change in the transportation charges and the m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in transit mixers from the premises of the customers on the basis of work orders issued. A perusal of the work order dated 1 April, 2008 issued to the appellant by Grasim Industries Ltd. indicates that the appellant was required to load RMC in the vehicles of the appellant and transport the same to the required destinations where it was required to be unloaded. The transportation charges payable to the appellant were in two parts. The appellant was to receive Rs. 140/- per cum for the quantity of RMC transported during the month. Under the second part, the appellant was to receive Rs. 20.34 per km for distance travelled in the transportation of RMC. 20. It is clear that under the work order, the appellant was required to load RMC in the vehicles belonging to the appellant and thereafter transport the RMC to the required destination and unload it. The work order does not speak of hiring the vehicles of the appellant. In fact the appellant was required to keep all its vehicles used for providing the service under the agreement in good working condition with periodical service and repair. The Commissioner has, however concluded from a perusal of the work order that the recip....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cannot be said to be a case of transportation of goods by road by a goods transport agency "because in the case of transport of goods by road the service recipient books a vehicle for transportation of goods and pays freight for such booking for the transportation of goods". The Commissioner failed to appreciate that under the work order, the appellant was required to transport RMC for which purpose the appellant was required to load RMC in the vehicles of the appellant and transport the same to the required destination and unload it. The requirement under the work order that the appellant should have a fleet of vehicles, adequate enough to transport 9000 M3 RMC every month would not mean that the appellant had given the vehicle on hire. The Commissioner was required to examine all the conditions of the work order but the finding is based on an assumption that vehicle was hired for transportation of RMC. 23. The Commissioner also fell into an error in assuming that if a minimum load of 745 cum per month per vehicle is not loaded, then too the appellant would be entitled to payment on this minimum quantity to conclude that in this manner payment would also be made for good....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant to the service recipient. 28. Thus, the appellant has been rendering GTA service by transporting RMC from one place to another as per the directions of the service recipient. The finding to the contrary recorded in the impugned order by the Commissioner that the appellant was not performing GTA service but was performing STG service cannot be sustained. 29. It is, therefore, not necessary to examine the other contentions raised by the Learned Counsel for the appellant. The impugned order dated 15 January, 2016 is accordingly, set aside and the appeal is allowed." 6. From the above decision of the principal Bench of this Tribunal, it can be seen that the facts such as transportation of RMC by similar vehicles for M/s. Ultratech Cement Limited for transportation from M/s. Ultratech Cement Limited plant to the customer‟s site of M/s. Ultratech Cement Limited, it was held that appellant in that case are rendering GTA service by transportation RMC from one place to another as per the direction of the service recipient. Therefore, the same is not classifiable under supply of Tangible Goods for Use service. 7. Considering the above decisio....