TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1117
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, 1994. During the course of verification of records, the departmental officers noticed that the appellant in their Balance Sheets for the financial years, 2003-04 and 2004-05, have shown total amount of Rs. 10,13,913/- towards clearing receipts on which Service Tax works out to Rs. 89,910/-and E. Cess of Rs. 880/- which is not paid by the assessee. Also, the assessee in their Balance sheets for the financial years, 2005-06 and 2007-08, have shown value of Rs. 21,69,250/- as Transportation receipts. Appellant have failed to show the copy of Lorry Receipts (LRs)/Consignment notes in support that they have rendered the service of GTA and are liable to pay Service Tax under Notification No. 35/2004 ST dated 03.12.2004 to the Departmental Officers during the verification. Hence, appellant is found liable to pay Service Tax of Rs.65,078/-, E. Cess Rs.1,301/- and S.H.E. Cess of Rs.575/- on the said amount which is not paid by them. The Range office made correspondences with the appellant for payment of Service Tax vide O.C No. 2700/08 dated 10.12.2008. In response to Range office letter, appellant has replied that they had rented their own Lorries for hire and received hire charges, and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax Vide Final Order No. 20417/2024 dated 20.05.2024, where after considering the issues in detail, it is held that; "6. Heard both sides. The period of dispute in the present case is 01.01.2005 to 30.06.2007 and during this period, the amended version of GTA is applicable. From the records and the facts as discussed by the Commissioner in the impugned order, it is an undisputed fact that the appellant was hiring vehicles from a third party so as to arrange the transportation of the PSC Poles to various destinations of the consignee. The waybills were generated by the appellant and raised fortnightly statements for getting payment from KSEB and no consignment note as such was issued. As and when the PSC Poles had to be transported, trucks were hired from various truck owners for transporting the poles and the freight charges were collected from their consignee i.e., KSEB. 6.1 In case of M/s. Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. v. CCE (supra), the Tribunal after considering the amended definitions of the GTA has held as follows: "6. .................While admittedly no consignment notes or GRs have....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll legal sense, for the cargo despatched by it and an individual truck operator who does not accept such responsibility, is merely performing the activity of transport of goods which is not the subject of the tax. It is, of course, necessary to point out, from the history of the tax on this service, that the blanket intent to tax the operators led to widespread agitation and, conscious of the problems of implementation, the Central Government, upon reintroduction of the levy, restricted it to agencies." 6.3 In the present case, admittedly vehicles were being hired by the appellant through a contract for transportation of the goods does not make them a Goods Transport Agency. Admittedly, no consignment notes were generated but fortnightly waybills were submitted by the appellant to their consignee for collecting the transport charges. In view of the above discussions and the decisions relied upon by the appellant, I am of the view that they cannot be considered as 'Goods Transport Agency', therefore, not liable to service tax. 7. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed." 4. As regards the penalty and the demand confir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounsel submits that the clearing receipts of Rs.10,13,913/- shown in the profit and loss account of the financial years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 is nothing but transportation receipts received from their customers for having hired their lorries for rent. The show cause notice has proposed to demand the above amount under GTA Service whereas the GTA service came into effect from 01.01.2005, hence the demand of service tax for the above two periods under GTA Service does not sustain. The lower authorities have erred in confirming the demand of service tax on clearing receipts under 'Clearing and Forwarding Agent Service' when the proposal in the show cause notice was to demand service tax under GTA Service. Hence the demand for the above period under GTA Service fails. 6. Learned Counsel submits that the Department has lost sight of the fact that only transport booking agents were brought under the tax net under the GTA category and not the owners /operators. The Department has not appreciated that they are not the transport agency, however they are the operators and hence they are not liable to pay service tax under the category of 'Goods Transport Agency' service.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hmd). Vedanta Limited Vs. CCE, 2023 (9) TMI 1063-CESTAT, Chennai vi. allavpur Paper Mfg. Ltd Vs. CCE, 2021 (5) TMI 440-CESTAT - Kolkatta vii. KMB Granites Pvt Ltd Vs. CCE, 2010 (19) STR 437 (T). viii. Shanti Fortune (I) Pvt Ltd Vs. CCE, 2010 (19) STR 883 (T). 11. Learned counsel submits that it is an admitted fact in the show cause notice itself that the Appellant was the service provider who rented their lorries, they cannot be held responsible for discharging service tax under GTA service, since GTA service is a notified service under section 68(2) of the Act read with Notification No.36/2004-ST, dated 31.12.2004 w.e.f.1.01.2005, consequent to which the service receiver would be liable to pay service tax. The Appellant place reliance on the following judicial decisions: i. MSPL Limited Vs. CCE, 2009 (13) STR 554 (T-Bang), ii. Bellary Iron ores Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, 2009 (13) STR (Tri-Bang). iii. Sicgil India Ltd Vs. CCE 2010 (19) STR 747 (T-Bang). iv. Essar Logistics Ltd Vs.CCE, 2014 (33) STR 588 (T). 12. Learned Counsel submits that the Department has demanded Service Tax solely based on figures appearing in the Prof....