Case Law Details
HEG Limited Vs Commissioner (Appeals) GST (CESTAT Delhi)
CESTAT Delhi held that exemption notification should be interpreted strictly. However, once the primary conditions for seeking exemption for GTA are satisfied, exemption cannot be denied for mere procedural lapse.
Facts- The Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of graphite electrodes falling under Chapter Heading 85451100 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant is registered both under Central Excise registration and service tax registration for providing/receiving various taxable services such as Business Auxiliary services, Banking & Financial Services, Cargo Handling service, Consulting Engineers services, Legal services and Renting of Immovable property services, Goods transport agency service etc.
The Appellant filed EXP-1 intimating their intention to avail exemption from service tax under Notification No. 18/2009 dated 07.07.2009 in respect of four services namely Banking & Financial Services, Goods Transport Agency service, Consulting Engineering service and Business Auxiliary services.
The Appellant claimed exemption from service tax under GTA service amounting to Rs. 37,89,292/-. The Appellant also filed EXP1s on 07.05.2014 in the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, to avail exemption from service tax under Notification No. 31/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 for GTA services received during the period April to September 2013.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
