Page 108 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2

194 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 37
ble under Section 65(105)(zzzzj) of the Finance Act, 1994 [The Act] w.e.f. 16 May,
2008, as what was supplied by the appellant was “tangible goods”, namely
“transit mixer” to its customer.
4. Accordingly, a show cause notice dated 15 October, 2014 was issued
to the appellant. The relevant portion of the show cause notice is reproduced be-
low :-
“2. On the basis of the information from the Deputy Commissioner, Cen-
tral Excise Division, III, Ghaziabad that during the course of audit of M/s
Samrudhi Cement Ltd. (Now M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd.), C-5, C-6 Shri
Krishna Plaza, Commercial Complex, Near Sai Temple, Nyay Khand-I. In-
dirapuram, Ghaziabad that they had hired Tangible Goods i.e. ”Transit
Mixture” from M/s. Gunesh Logistics, CC-224, Gole Market, Jawahar Na-
gar, Jaipur for transporting the RMC.
3. --------- On perusal of the information, it was revealed that during the
period of 2009-10 to 2012-13 the Noticee had received the total amount of
Rs. 12,18,77,755/- against the supply of tangible goods from M/s. Samrudhi
Cement Ltd, Ghaziabad (UP), M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd., Ghaziabad (UP)
and M/s. Gunesh (India) Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. On the basis of details provided
by the Noticee, it has been observed that total amount of service tax
Rs. 1,32,78,313/- had not been paid by the notice for the period of 2009-10
to 2012-13 on account of tangible goods services provided by them.
4. Thus, it appears that the Noticee is engaged in providing supply of
Tangible goods which is taxable services as per section 65(105)(zzzj) of Fi-
nance Act, 1994 as the Noticee had supplied Tangible goods namely
“Transit mixture” to M/s. Samrudhi Cement Ltd., Ghaziabad, M/s. Grasim
Industries Ltd., Ghaziabad (UP) and M/s. Gunesh (India) Pvt. Ltd. Jaipur
but had not paid Service Tax leviable thereon.
5. --------
6. Now, therefore, M/s Gunesh Logistics, CC-224, Gole Market, Jawahar
Nagar, Jaipur are hereby called upon to explain and show cause to the
Commissioner, Central Excise Commissionerate-1, NCR Building, Statue
Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur within 30 days of the receipt of this notice, as to
why :-
(i) Service Tax amounting to Rs. 1,32,78,313/- (Service Tax
Rs. 1,28,91,566/- + Edu. Cess Rs. 2,57,832/-+ SHE. Cess
Rs. 1,28,915/-) should not be recovered from them under proviso to
Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994;
(ii) Interest should not be recovered from them on the Service Tax
amount not paid under the provisions of Section 75 of the Finance
Act, 1994;
(iii) Penalty should not be imposed upon them under Sections 77 & 78 of
the Finance Act, 1994 for contravention of the provisions of Sections
67, 68, 69 & 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Rules 4, 6 & 7 of
the Service Tax Rules, 1994"
5. The appellant filed a detailed reply dated 20 April, 2015 to the show
cause notice and pointed out that the activity of transportation of RMC is not
covered under the taxable service STG. It was highlighted that service tax on STG
would get attracted when the supply of tangible goods is for the use of a service
recipient, but in the instant case the work orders did not relate to supply of
‘transit mixtures’ but related to transportation of RMC. The appellant also point-
GST LAW TIMES  11th June 2020  108