Exemption to GTA Services

@ pankaj

I know what is hire. But has the querists said that the GTA is giving services of hire?

He has just said that he his giving service of GTA. Now normally service of GTA means transportation. If the querist clarifies that it hire then it is exempt, I think both of us agreed to that. But if it is transportation then subject to the fact whether the recipient GTA is a partnership or company then again it is exempt and there I think both of us agreed to that also. But there is no blanket exemption on services to GTA to GTA.

Now you are assuming that it hire services. I am sticking to the facts as of now told by querist.

My consultation is always based on facts presented to me and not assumptions.

@ RAJA

You yourself proved my point with this respect. The Authority itself said that the service of hire is different from service of GTA.

And the person asking the query has asked about GTA services as of now. So Pankaj I don't think you should assume it is hire. You should actually clarify it from the querist and the about the possible conclusions we have discussed above.

No Mr Zafar.,

As per You above said notification and point number are exempted (Nil). So, No way for charging (chargeable) Gst for GTA supply service to GTA (if registered or URD).

You are welcome to remain with your opinion. I have already explained everything and I hope the querist gets the answer he was searching for.

Originally posted by : Pankaj Rawat
	@ Zafar When one GTA is giving service to another GTA , then he is hiring his vehicle , he is not giving transportation service to GTA , it's customer ,who is Availing the service of Transportation of Goods. If you read the Notification 12/2017 CT (R) Service's by way of giving on hire-(a).....(b) to GTA , means transportation of goods. So from above it's specifically mentioned the "by way of giving hire" means either GTA or transporter who is giving his vehicle on hiring basis to GTA (for transportation of Goods) is Exempted services .So it's advisable before raising finger go through the wording of Notification carefully.

Yeah... Correctly state the points Mr Pankaj Rawat Ji... 👏👏👏

Dear Mr Raja Ji & CA Altamush

At this forum, we are not to let one another down. This is for knowledge sharing and enhancement. Everyone has a different way of interpretation of the laws. I welcome the opinion of each one of the members of this forum but leg pulling over such issues must be abstained from! 🙏

Ps. Thanks to
Mr.Raja Ji😁

True. My only problem was one should only answer when he knows the answer based on facts and not assumptions. Giving opinion without knowledge or assumptions misguide the querists and confuses them and this also creates doubt on the platform.

You are most welcome Mr Pankaj Rawat Ji...

CA Altamush
Who is going to decide that reply is according to law & correctly interpreted not on assumption. Yes I agree with you that queriest must be have correct & precise answer. but everyone has their own opinions & can be differ.

So in my view queriest is enough smart to choose the correct.