Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

C.C.E. & S.T.-Vapi vs M/S Sejal Architectural Glass Ltd on 4 April, 2018

        

 

In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal
West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad

Appeal No.ST/409/2009 -DB
[Arising out of OIA No.KRS/191/VAPI.2009 dated 31.07.2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Vapi]

C.C.E. & S.T.-Vapi	                                              Appellant

Vs
M/s Sejal Architectural Glass Ltd		                    Respondent

Represented by:

For Appellant: Shri K.J.Kinariwala,(AR) For Respondent: None CORAM:
HONBLE DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HONBLE Mr. DEVENDER SINGH, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Date of Hearing/Decision:04.04.2018 Final Order No. A / 10651/2018 Per: Dr. D.M. Misra None present for the Respondent. Heard Ld. AR for the Revenue.

2. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. KRS/191/VAPI/2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise and Customs  Vapi.

3. The short issue involved in the present appeals is whether the Respondent are entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 in discharging service tax on GTA services. The Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) in the impugned order had observed that the Respondent had complied with the conditions of the Notification inasmuch as the necessary declarations were obtained from the Transport Agencies on non-availment of the benefit of Notification 12/2003 dated 19.06.2003 and CENVAT Credit on inputs/capital goods in providing the said service; also he has observed that the Respondent being required to discharge the GTA service tax, as receipient of service under the reverse charge mechanism principle.

4. We do not find any discrepancy in the impugned order, a similar view has been expressed by this Tribunal in similar circumstances in the case of Lykes Line Ltd. vs CST-Mumbai-I 2017 (50) STR 51 (Tri. Mum). In the result, the impugned order is upheld and the Revenues appeal is dismissed.

 (Dictated and pronounced in the open court)

(Mr. Devender Singh)				(Dr. D.M. Misra) 
Member (Technical)					Member (Judicial)


Neha




2 | Page
ST/409/2009-DB