Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
(F.M.) Northern Coalfields Ltd vs C.C.E., Allahabad on 6 July, 2015
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CIRCUIT BENCH AT ALLAHABAD Date of hearing/decision: 6.7.2015 Service Tax Appeal Nos.1018.1022, 1023 of 2009 Arising out of the order in appeal No.42, 43, 44/ST/APPL/Alld/09 dated 3.7.2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Allahabad. For approval and signature: Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President Honble Mr. H.K. Thakur, Technical Member 1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 26 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 26 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? (F.M.) Northern Coalfields Ltd. . Appellants Vs. C.C.E., Allahabad .. Respondent
Appearance:
Present Shri Inderjeet Yadav , Advocate for the appellants Present Shri Govind Dixit, A.R. for the Respondent/Revenue Coram: Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President Honble Mr. H.K. Thakur, Technical Member Final Order No.52161 52163/2015 Per Justice G. Raghuram:
The assessee is the appellant and recipient of service which was concurrently classified as Goods Transport Agency Service, defined in Section 65 (50b) and enumerated to be taxable service in Section 65(015)(zzzp) of the Act.
2. For the period January 2005 to March, 2008, the coal raised in the appellants the mines (appellant/assessee is Northern Coalfields Ltd.), was transported from the pithead to the Railway siding after an intermediary journey to a crusher unit. For this purpose, the appellant engaged tippers provided by private parties. Coal from the storage point in the appellants mine was carried by tippers/dumpers to the Coal Handling Plant (CHP) and from the CHP to silos by a conveyor belt. The transportation by tipper/dumper from the storage point to the crusher unit within the mine area was on a road and maintained by the appellant.
2. The appellant contended before the authorities below that since the transporters (engaged by the appellant) did not issue any consignment note whether called by such or any other name, the service provided fell outside the purview of GTA service and the appellant wasthus immune to the levy as a recipient, under Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994.
3. Since the authorities below concurrently rejected the contention of the appellant, the assessee is before us in a further appeal, assailing the order dated 3.7.2009 of the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Allahabad.
4. The issue is no longer res integra and is covered by the decision of this Tribunal in South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. 2014 TIOL 1554 CESTAT DEL and Western Coal Fields Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Nagpur, a decision dated 7.4.2015 in Order No.A/896-898/15/STB; the latter decision following the earlier. This Tribunal ruled that issuance of a consignment note is non- derrogable ingredient for classification of an activity as Goods Transport Agency Service defined in Section 65 (50b) of the Act.
5. Since there is no issuance of consignment note by transporters who provided the services to the appellant, there is no rendition of GTA service, legitimizing levy and collection of t ax under that category.
6. For the aforesaid reason, the impugned order is quashed and the appellant is declared to be not liable to levy and collection of service tax, interest or penalty under the category of Goods Transport Agency service. No costs.
andl (Justice G. Raghuram) President (H.K. Thakur) Technical Member scd/ 1