Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2014 (6) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2014 (6) TMI 625 - AT - Service Tax


Issues:
1. Adjustment of excess Service Tax demand paid under protest.
2. Demand related to excess Cenvat credit availed on input services.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Adjustment of excess Service Tax demand paid under protest
The appellant, M/s. Mumbai International Airport Pvt. Ltd. (MIAPL), had paid Service Tax under protest for leasing part of premises to clients during May 2006 to Feb 2007. Upon seeking clarification from the department, they were informed that Service Tax was not payable on rentals/lease charges by the Airport Operator as per Circular No. 80/10/2004-S.T. The appellant adjusted the excess Service Tax paid under protest against the tax liability for January-March 2007, in line with Rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The Tribunal found that the adjustment made by the appellant was in accordance with the law. The department was directed to verify if the amount adjusted was indeed the excess tax paid by the appellant. If found that no Service Tax was due, then the penalty would not apply.

Issue 2: Demand related to excess Cenvat credit availed on input services
The appellant had availed excess Cenvat credit of Rs. 1,41,15,163/- on input services, exceeding the 20% cap as per Rule 6(3)(c) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal referred to a clarification by the C.B.E. & C. in Circular No. 137/12/2008-CX.4, stating that utilization of accumulated credit on account of the 20% cap was permissible from 1-4-2008. Therefore, the demand for the excess Cenvat credit was deemed not sustainable in law. The Tribunal ruled that only interest on the amount of excess credit utilized prior to 1-4-2008 could be recovered from the appellant. The matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority for fresh consideration in light of the Board's clarification and the relevant provisions of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, ensuring the appellant's right to be heard before a new decision is made.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates