9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (3) TMI 994 - AT - Service TaxLiability of service tax - the appellant has received advances from various parties and the Department was of the view that service tax was required to be paid on such advances - Held that - from the copies of the certificates placed on record, it is seen that the appellant has written off such advances and hence there will be no liability for payment of service tax. But since such certificates were procured only subsequent to the date of the impugned order, the appellant could not produce the same before the adjudicating authority. Matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for a de novo decision in the matter after perusing the additional documents which the appellant is in a position to submit - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Appeal against service tax liability on advances received for construction work, condonation of delay in filing appeal. Analysis: The appeal was filed against an Order-in-Original regarding the liability to pay service tax on advances received for construction work. The appellant, engaged in construction services, collected advances but did not carry out the construction due to order cancellations. The appellant argued that since the advances were returned to the parties, there should be no service tax liability. The appellant possessed certificates confirming the cancellation of orders and return of advances, which were not submitted during adjudication. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and perusing the certificates, concluded that as the advances were written off, there was no obligation to pay service tax. However, since the certificates were obtained after the impugned order, the appellant could not present them to the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision based on the additional documents, particularly the certificates provided by the appellant. The appellant was granted an opportunity for an effective hearing during the de novo proceedings. Consequently, the impugned order was overturned, and the appeal was allowed by way of remand. The decision was pronounced in open court on 11/12/2017.
|
