2017 (12) TMI 508 - AT - Service Tax

Reverse charge mechanism - case of the department is that appellant have received various services from foreign based service providers - Held that - As regard the correct quantification of the demand, this issue being purely matter of fact, need to be verified from the records - no proper findings on the discrepancies were given - matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for passing a fresh order after verification of the above re-quantification on the basis of records of the appellant - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Service tax liability on services received from foreign-based providers, quantification of demand, adjustment of excess tax paid, refund claim, correctness of adjudicating authority's order.

Analysis:
The case involved a service tax demand raised on the appellant for services received from foreign-based providers. The appellant, a registered service tax assessee, challenged the demand, claiming they had paid excess tax both before and after a certain date and were entitled to a refund. The appellant raised objections on the quantification of the demand, pointing out various discrepancies in the calculation. They argued that they were entitled to a refund after adjustments for amounts paid erroneously and before specific dates. The appellant cited legal precedents supporting their claim for adjustment of excess tax paid against subsequent periods.

The appellant submitted a detailed re-quantification chart to support their arguments. The Tribunal noted the discrepancies highlighted by the appellant and found that the adjudicating authority had not provided proper findings on these issues. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for a fresh order based on verification of the re-quantification provided by the appellant. The Tribunal kept all issues raised by the appellant open and directed the adjudicating authority to grant the appellant a sufficient opportunity for a personal hearing before passing a new adjudication order. The appeal was disposed of by way of remand to the adjudicating authority.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments regarding the quantification of the demand and the adjustment of excess tax paid. The case highlighted the importance of proper verification and findings by the adjudicating authority in tax matters. The decision to remand the case reflected the need for a thorough examination of the discrepancies raised by the appellant before reaching a final decision on the service tax liability and refund claim.