Legal Disclaimer

As per rules of the Bar Council of India, lawyers and law firms are not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By clicking "I Agree", the user acknowledges:

The information provided on this website is solely available at your request for informational purposes and should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertisement.

HNM Legal Services is not liable for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on information provided under this website.

Whether GTA services can be treated as part of C&F Agency services when both are provided under the same agreement?

10 Aug 2026

M/s Adarsh Marketing & Anr. v. Commissioner, Central Excise & CGST, Jaipur-I

CESTAT, New Delhi | Service Tax Appeal Nos. 50984, 50985 & 50972 of 2021 | Final Order Nos. 51147-51149/2026 | Decided on 09.07.2026 | Coram: Binu Tamta, Member (Judicial) & P.V. Subba Rao, Member (Technical)

Background

The Appellants had entered into agreements with their principals to provide Clearing & Forwarding (C&F) Agent services as well as Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services. They paid Service Tax on the amounts received for C&F services but did not pay Service Tax on the GTA amounts, contending that the two services were separately identified and that the transportation amounts were merely reimbursements. The Revenue treated the transportation activity as an integral part of the C&F service and demanded Service Tax on the entire amount.

Issue

Whether amounts received for GTA services can be included in the consideration for C&F Agency services merely because both services were provided under the same agreement.

Tribunal's Reasoning and Decision

The Tribunal held that the two services could not be treated as a single bundled service merely because they were covered under the same agreement. The agreements specifically provided separate rates and remuneration for C&F and transportation services, establishing that they were distinct services.

The Tribunal further noted that the appellants issued Goods Receipts/Consignment Notes for the transportation activity and that the principals were body corporates. Accordingly, under the applicable reverse-charge mechanism, the Service Tax liability on GTA services rested with the service recipients and not the appellants. Following its earlier decisions on the identical issue, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and allowed all three appeals, with consequential reliefs.

 

(Above brief of the judgement prepared by Ms. Shweta Singh, Advocate, Dated: 10 Aug 2026)

Share: Facebook LinkedIn WhatsApp
Chat with us