Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Service Tax, Ranchi vs M/S Hec Ltd on 24 August, 2017
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA Service Tax Appeal Nos. 71221-71223 of 2013 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 142-144/RAN/2013 dated 25.07.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), Ranchi) DATE OF HEARING : 24.08.2017 DATE OF DECISION : 24.08.2017 Commissioner of Service Tax, Ranchi . Appellant (Rep by Sh. A. Roy, DR) VERSUS M/s HEC Ltd. . Respondents
M/s Shankar & Co. (Rep. By NONE) M/s Sheevas Syndicate CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE (DR.) SATISH CHANDRA, PRESIDENT HONBLE MR. V. PADMANABHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) FINAL ORDER NO. FO/76831-76833/2017 PER V. PADMANABHAN :
List revised. None is present for the assessee-Respondents. In the absence of the assessee-Respondents, we have heard Shri A. Roy, learned DR for the Department and perused the material available on record.
2. From the record, it appears that the present appeals have been filed by the Department against the Order-in-Appeal No. 142-143/RAN/2013 dated 25.07.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), Ranchi.
3. The dispute in the present case is regarding the classification of the services rendered by the assessee-Respondents. The assessee-Respondents had rendered the services of the nature of loading & unloading of goods, breaking & segregation and also transportation of goods by road services. The Department was of the view that the above services will meet classification under the category of Cargo Handing Services, where no abatement is available for the payment of Service Tax. The claim of the assessee-Respondents before the lower authorities was that, the activities, such as, loading & unloading as well as breaking & segregation were carried out prior to and incidental to the transportation of the goods by road services. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) had placed reliance on the CBECs Circular No. 104/137/154/2008-CX.4 dated 21.08.2008 in which it has been clarified that if any ancillary/intermediate service is provided in relation to transportation of goods, and the charges, if any, for such services are included in the invoice issued by the GTA, and not by any other person, such service would form part of GTA service. Accordingly, the lower authority had approved the Service Tax paid in the category of GTA.
4. Cargo Handling Service defined under Section 65(23) of the Finance Act, 1994 is reproduced below :
Cargo handling service means loading, unloading, packing or unpacking of cargo and includes, - (a) cargo handling services provided for freight in special containers or for non-containerised freight, services provided by a container freight terminal or any other freight terminal, for all modes of transport, and cargo handling service incidental to freight, but does not include handling of export cargo as passenger, luggage or more transportation of good. The activities carried out by the assessee-Respondents are primarily transportation of goods and loading & unloading etc. which are incidental to the transportation of goods. Such activities cannot be covered within the services of Cargo Handling as has been rightly held by the lower authorities.
5. In view of the above, we find no infirmity in the impugned order and the same is hereby upheld.
6. In the result, the appeals filed by the Department are dismissed.
(Dictated & pronounced in the open court) \ (V. PADMANABHAN) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) (JUSTICE (Dr.) SATISH CHANDRA) PRESIDENT Golay 1 A.No. ST/71221/13 & ORS