2007 (9) TMI 249 - AT - Service Tax

Refund - bar of unjust enrichment Revenue s contention that after the issuance of the C.A. s certificate, the appellant might have recovered the said amount from their customers, is not acceptable - Admittedly, the service tax amount was shown separately in the invoices - As the tax was not paid at the time of payment of services value, the Revenue s contention is in the realm of assumptions and presumption impugned order of commissioner is upheld appeal rejected

Summary

Issues:
Refund of service tax - unjust enrichment

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD involved two appeals, one by the appellant and the other by the Revenue, both stemming from the same impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals). The main issue at hand was the refund of service tax. The Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected a refund claim of Rs. 63,77,216 on the grounds of unjust enrichment, as the appellant had recovered this amount from their clients. The appellant's advocate acknowledged this fact, leading to the rejection of the appeal by M/s. Gujarat Chemical Port Terminal Co. Ltd.

Regarding the Revenue's appeal, the dispute centered around an amount of Rs. 7,60,542 that the Commissioner (Appeals) deemed not recovered by the appellant from their customers, supported by invoices and a Chartered Accountant's certificate. The Revenue argued that the appellant might have recovered this amount post the certificate issuance. However, the Tribunal noted that the taxable event for service tax is the realization of payment for services rendered, not the time of service provision. As the tax was not paid when services were rendered, the Revenue's argument was based on assumptions. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision, rejecting the Revenue's appeal as well.

In conclusion, both appeals were dismissed based on the above analysis, with the Tribunal finding no merit in the arguments presented by either party.