2014 (2) TMI 760 - AT - Service Tax

Revenue seeking adjournment - Most of the Service Tax matters involve revenue of more than Rs.1 crore. It is also informed that instructions are being sought even for stay matters where the Service Tax demand involved is Rs.1 crore and above. This would imply that except for a handful of cases, the Revenue will be seeking adjournments in almost all Service Tax matters which will certainly be detrimental to its interest and the Revenue s case will go unrepresented. In this scenario, it is imperative that appropriate and expedite decision is taken by the CBEC, so that Revenue is effectively represented. The Registry is directed to mark a copy of this order to the Chief Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai, the Chief Commissioner (AR), CESTAT, New Delhi and also to the Member (Service Tax)/Member (L&J), CBE & C for appropriate action.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appointment of Special Counsel for Service Tax Appeals involving revenue over Rs.1 crore.
2. Lack of representation for Revenue in Service Tax matters.
3. Seeking instructions for stay matters with Service Tax demand over Rs.1 crore.
4. Concerns regarding Revenue's interest in Service Tax cases.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the issue of appointing a Special Counsel for Service Tax Appeals involving revenue exceeding Rs.1 crore. The learned Addl. Commissioner (AR) informed the tribunal about the Revenue's intention to seek instructions from the Board for appointing a Special Counsel due to the significant revenue involved in the appeals related to M/s Air India Charter Ltd., M/s First Flight Couriers Ltd., and M/s DHL Logistics Pvt. Ltd.

2. The judgment highlights the concern over the lack of representation for the Revenue in Service Tax matters, especially when the revenue involved is substantial. It is noted that most Service Tax cases involve revenue exceeding Rs.1 crore, and seeking instructions for stay matters with such high demands may lead to adjournments, potentially harming the Revenue's interests by leaving its case unrepresented.

3. The tribunal emphasizes the importance of expeditiously addressing the issue to ensure effective representation of the Revenue in Service Tax cases. It is pointed out that seeking instructions for cases with Service Tax demands over Rs.1 crore might result in frequent adjournments, which could be detrimental to the Revenue's position. The judgment calls for prompt action by the CBEC to prevent such scenarios.

4. In response to the concerns raised, the Registry is directed to send a copy of the order to the Chief Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai, the Chief Commissioner (AR) of CESTAT, New Delhi, and the Member (Service Tax)/Member (L&J) of CBE & C for necessary action. This directive aims to ensure appropriate measures are taken to address the issue and safeguard the interests of the Revenue in Service Tax matters. The judgment concludes by ordering the distribution of the order through Dasti for implementation.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment provides insights into the challenges faced in representing the Revenue in Service Tax Appeals involving substantial revenue amounts and underscores the need for prompt and effective action to address the issue and protect the Revenue's interests in such cases.