2010 (5) TMI 865 - AT - Service Tax

Auctioneer s service Demand of service tax along with interest and penalty Demand on the basis of figure worked out from the balance sheet assessee submitted that actual amount received by them from the growers and buyers of tobacco for rendering auctioning service is much less, and produced a copy of reconciliation statement Matter remanded to adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication

Summary

Issues:
Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax, Interest, and Penalty amounts.

Analysis:
The stay petition was filed seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax, Interest under section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994, and Penalty under section 78 of the Act. The Tribunal heard both sides and examined the records. It was observed that the appeal could be disposed of promptly as the matter was narrow in scope. The applicant had already deposited a substantial amount. The Tribunal decided to waive the pre-deposit condition for the remaining balance and proceed with the appeal.

The appellant contended that the lower authority confirmed a demand based on a figure derived from the balance sheet, which was higher than the actual amount received for providing 'auctioning service.' The appellant presented a reconciliation statement to support this claim. However, the learned JDR argued that these figures were not submitted before the lower authority for consideration. The Tribunal carefully reviewed the submissions and records. The appellant requested a remand to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration of the actual liability based on the figures they were willing to produce. The Tribunal acknowledged the factual complexity of the issue concerning the calculation of service tax liability and the importance of reconciling the figures provided by the appellant.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication, keeping all issues open. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, and the stay application along with the appeal was disposed of accordingly.