2014 (3) TMI 268 - AT - Service Tax

Demand of service tax - Adjudicating authority did not calculate tax liability under various services - Adjudicating authority in the order potion has confirmed demand of Rs. 1,09,68,041/- as an amount liable to be paid by the appellant under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. As against the confirmed demand, the adjudicating authority in order-in-original has specifically recorded that service tax has been demanded on various services; as enumerated herein earlier. If that be so, it is bounden duty of the adjudicating authority to come to a conclusion as to exact amount of tax liability on individual service, if any, rendered by the appellant after examining the records. In our view, the issue needs reconsideration by the adjudicating authority to come to the conclusion and work out the service tax liability under individual service - Decided in favour of assessee by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Service tax liability of various services rendered by the appellant, including "Commercial or Industrial Service", "Site formation and clearance", "excavation and earth moving and demolition service", "supply of tangible goods for use service", and "GTA service".

Detailed Analysis:
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad, comprising M V Ravindran and H K Thakur, JJ., addressed a stay petition where it was observed that the appeal could be disposed of due to a narrow compass of the issue. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the service tax liability on multiple services was contested on the grounds of incorrect calculation based on balance sheet figures and amounts received from service recipients. An approximate amount of Rs. 41 lakhs was deposited during the appeal's pendency, seeking a remand to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration.

The learned AR contended that the adjudicating authority had determined the appellant's tax liability under various services but had not considered the cum-tax benefit relief claimed by the appellant, nor calculated the tax liability for each service category. Upon careful consideration and record perusal, the Tribunal noted that the adjudicating authority confirmed a demand of Rs. 1,09,68,041/- under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, without specifying the exact tax liability for individual services. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that a reconsideration by the adjudicating authority was necessary to determine the precise tax liability for each service, emphasizing the importance of following principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for a de novo proceeding, with the instruction to retain the deposit with the department until the conclusion of the reconsideration process. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, keeping all issues open for further examination. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in court by the Tribunal.