Raja Abhishek For NIRC 2024

@abhishekrajaram

about 2 months ago

ā€¢View on Twitter

š—–š—˜š—¦š—§š—”š—§ š—–š—µš—²š—»š—»š—®š—¶ š—„š˜‚š—¹š—¶š—»š—“ š—¼š—» š—¦š—²š—暝˜ƒš—¶š—°š—² š—§š—®š˜… š—®š—»š—± š—šš—§š—” š—¦š—²š—暝˜ƒš—¶š—°š—²š˜€ šŸ“¢ š—§š—µš—² š—§š—暝—¶š—Æš˜‚š—»š—®š—¹ š—暝˜‚š—¹š—²š—±: "The appellant, having only collected actual freight charges without any additional margin, is not liable for Service Tax under GTA services, as no extra charges were levied beyond reimbursement."

šŸ” š—™š—®š—°š˜š˜€: š—–š—¼š—ŗš—½š—®š—»š˜†: M/s. Jetway Forwarders Private Limited š—œš˜€š˜€š˜‚š—²: The appellant, a Custom House Agent, received a Show Cause Notice demanding Service Tax for allegedly providing Goods Transport Agency services by collecting freight charges. The Additional Commissioner confirmed the demand with interest and penalties under Sections 75, 77, and 78, asserting that tax was owed on these charges.

āš–ļø š—š˜‚š—±š—“š—ŗš—²š—»š˜: The Tribunal ruled that M/s. Jetway Forwarders Private Limited was not liable for Service Tax under GTA services, as it only collected actual freight charges as reimbursement without any profit margin. The absence of additional charges led to the dismissal of the Service Tax demand, following prior appellate authority findings.

šŸ“œ š—–š—®š˜€š—² š—œš—»š—³š—¼š—暝—ŗš—®š˜š—¶š—¼š—»: š—§š—¶š˜š—¹š—²: M/s. Jetway Forwarders Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise š—¦š—²š—暝˜ƒš—¶š—°š—² š—§š—®š˜… š—”š—½š—½š—²š—®š—¹ š—”š—¼. 40493 of 2014 š—¢š—暝—±š—²š—æ š——š—®š˜š—²: 18 August 2023 šŸ“œ This ruling confirms that Service Tax on GTA services is not applicable when a CHA collects only the actual freight charges without any markup, as these are deemed pure reimbursements without taxable service components.

More from @abhishekrajaramReply on Twitter

Page created with TweetHunter

Write your own