Case Law Details
M/s Rathi Tiles Pvt. Limited Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi)
The question which has been decided by the lower authorities is whether the appellant is liable to pay service tax by considering such debit notes as consignment notes. I have perused the various case laws cited by both The issue which stands settled in the various case laws cited by the appellant is that as long as no consignment note is issued in terms of Rule 4B of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 by the transporter, the service tax liability under the category of GTA service does not arise. There is no dispute in the facts of the present case that the individual truck owners do not issue any consignment notes. The debit notes issued by the appellant indicating the freight payable cannot be considered as a consignment note as per Rule 4B ibid.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT JUDGMENT
The present appeals are filed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 240 – 242(SRM) ST/JDR/2018 dated 28.02.2018/08.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & CGST, Jodhpur.
2. Brief facts involved in all the appeals are identical and therefore the appeals are taken together for a decision. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of marble slabs and tiles. They receive marble blocks from mines and cleared the final products from their factory. The dispute in the present case is regarding the payment of service tax on freight charges paid by the appellant for transport of marble slabs from the mines to the appellant’s factory. The claim of the appellant is that such transportation is undertaken through individual truck owners who are paid the freight by the appellant and the only document which is issued for the transaction is a debit voucher prepared by the appellant. The Department was of the view that the appellant is liable to pay service tax on such freight charges under the category of Goods Transport Agency services, under reverse charge basis in terms of Rule 2(1)(d)(b) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 read with the Notification No. 35/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004. Accordingly, both the authorities below have ordered payment of service tax and aggrieved by the same the present appeals are filed by the appellant.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
