The CESTAT, Mumbai in M/s. Auto Cars v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Aurangabad [Service Tax Appeal No. 87630 of 2016 and 85895 of 2017 dated September 16, 2022] set aside the recovery demand orders against the assessee. Held that, the activity carried on by the assessee for providing the services of ‘Goods Transport Agency’ (“GTA”) does not fall within the category of ‘Clearing and Forwarding Agent’, provided to several recipients who were liable to discharge tax dues on freight under ‘Reverse Charge Mechanism (“RCM”)’ after availing permissible abatement.
Source a2ztaxcorp
Latest Posts in "India"
- Meghalaya Extends VAT Exemption on Fruit Wine to 10 Years, Boosting Local Wine Industry
- Allahabad HC: Arbitrary GST Registration Cancellations Without Reasons Amount to ‘Economic Death’ for Businesses
- Chennai Fake GST Invoice Racket Busted; ₹350 Crore Evasion Suspected, Prime Accused Arrested
- Overpaid GST: Rectification or Refund? Understanding When to Adjust and When to Claim Refund
- Insurance Brokers Push for Zero-Rated GST to Restore Input Tax Credit and Prevent Premium Hikes
