Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Salem Co-Operative Sugar Mills vs Cce (St), Salem on 1 February, 2010
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
ST/MISC/01 & 02/2010 and ST/S/303 & 314/2009 and
S/491 & 501/2009
(Arising out of Orders-in-Appeal No.126/2009 (SLM) (ST) dated 17.8.2009 and No. 132/2009 (SLM) (ST) dated 28.8.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Salem)
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President
Honble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for Publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
M/s. Salem Co-Operative Sugar Mills
M/s. Dharmapuri Dt. Co.Op. Sugar Mills Ltd. Appellants
Vs.
CCE (ST), Salem Respondent
Appearance Shri G. Derrick, Advocate, for the Appellants Shri C. Rangaraju, SDR for the Respondent CORAM Honble Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President Honble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member Date of Hearing: 01.02.2010 Date of Decision: 01.02.2010 Misc. Order Nos. ____________ Stay Order Nos. _____________ Final Order Nos. ____________ Per Jyoti Balasundaram The miscellaneous applications for raising the additional ground that the mills (appellants) received service only from the truck owners/tractor owners who do not fall within the definition of goods transport agency and therefore the applicants are not required to discharge service tax liability, are allowed as we find that this ground is based upon the decision of the Tribunal in CCE, Guntur Vs. Kanaga Durga Agro Oil Products Pvt. Ltd. 2009 (15) STR 399.
2. On a query from the Bench at the stage of hearing the applications for waiver of predeposit as to how the assessees would establish that they received services from individuals, the learned counsel for the appellants files a list of the truck/ tractor owners and pleads that since they are all individuals who have provided the services, the assessee is not liable to service tax.
3. We find that these details of the owners of vehicles on which the goods were transported, was not before the authorities below and therefore the interest of justice require that the case be remanded to the adjudicating authority for verification of the above submission of the assessees. If it is found that the assessees are correct in the contention that the transporters were individual truck/tractor owners, the decision of the Tribunal cited supra would be applicable and no service tax demand can be sustained against the assessees. It is for this purpose that we remit these cases for fresh decision to the adjudicating authority after setting aside the impugned orders and after granting the prayer for waiver of predeposit. Fresh orders are to be passed as expeditiously as possible after extending a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessees.
4. The appeals are thus allowed by way of remand.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy) (Jyoti Balasundaram)
Technical Member Vice President
Rex
??
??
??
??
3