Shripad Concrete Private Limited Vs ommissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
The issue before the CESTAT Ahmedabad was whether transportation of Ready-mix Concrete (RMC) by Transit Mixture Vehicles for Ultratech Cement Limited was classifiable as “Supply of Tangible Goods for Use” or as transportation of goods.
The appellant was engaged, inter alia, in providing Transportation of Goods Service and Commercial or Industrial Construction Service. It transported RMC belonging to Ultratech Cement Limited from its batching plants at Udhna and Magdalla, Surat, to construction sites. The work orders stated that the appellant was responsible for transporting and delivering RMC according to the prescribed schedule.
The Department took the view that the appellant had provided vehicles to Ultratech Cement Limited and that, since possession and effective control over the vehicles remained with the appellant, the activity was liable to service tax under the category of Supply of Tangible Goods for Use.
The appellant contended that the contracts were for transportation of RMC and not for supply or hiring of vehicles. It relied upon Gunesh Logistics vs. CCE & ST, 2019 (9) TMI 1419, where an identical transportation arrangement involving Ultratech Cement Limited had been held not liable under Supply of Tangible Goods for Use. The appellant also relied upon decisions including State of Gujarat (Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ahmedabad) vs. M/s Variety Body Builders, Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. Walchandnagar Industries, Modi Company vs. Union of India, GS Lamba & Sons vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited vs. UOI, Lakshmi Audio Visual Inc. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Rastriya Ispat Nigam Limited vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Andhra Pradesh.
