M/S. ANGIPLAST PVT. LTD. Vs. CST AHMEDABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against order -in -appeal No. 282/2011(STC)/k.anpazhakan/Commr.(A)/Ahd, dt. 2.11.11. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that during the course of audit it was noticed that the appellant were paying freight charges for outward transportation of the goods and had not discharged the service tax liability. It was concluded that the appellant being recipient of goods transport agency services and as per the provisions of Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 is required to discharge such service tax liability on the reverse charge mechanism as provided under provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. Appellant were issued show cause notice by the department demanding the service tax liability. The appellant replied to the said show cause notice claiming that out of the total service tax liability demanded, the transporters have paid an amount of Rs. 40,850/ - and balance of Rs. 22,349/ - is discharged by the appellant as a recipient of the services for inward transportation. The adjudicating authority after following the due process of law confirmed the demands appropriated the amount paid by the appellant against demand of Rs. 22,349/ - and imposed penalties besides seeking recovery of interest from the appellant.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by such an order, appellant preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority also did not agree with the contentions raised by the appellant and upheld the order -in -original.

(3.) SHE would also rely upon the CBEC circular No. dated 17.12.04 which specifically states as to that service tax is discharged by the transporters, service tax should not be discharged from any other person to avoid double taxation.