2018 (5) TMI 829 - AT - Service Tax

Business Auxiliary Service - job charges said to have been received but for which Service Tax was not paid - Held that - The dispute pertains to the period 2005-06 and we note that during the said period the Service Tax was payable on the amount receipt basis. Hence the actual receipt of commission and the service tax payable thereon will need to be verified by the original authority. In respect of the amount of commission/trade discount it is submission of the assessee-Appellants that such amount does not pertain to the activity of job work carried out by them but pertains to the activity of selling of the product from M/s SAIL. This aspect has not been discussed. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution, restoration of appeal, decision on merits, dispute over Service Tax on job charges, inclusion of commission in job charges, arguments by both parties, justification of impugned order, verification of commission and trade discount details, demand raised under Business Auxiliary Service, consideration of submissions, remand of the matter for de novo orders.

Analysis:
The judgment involves the recall of an earlier order where the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution, now restored for decision on merits. The appeal was against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Jaipur, for the period 2004-05 to 2005-06. The assessee-Appellants provided taxable services falling under "Business Auxiliary Service" and were engaged in job work for their parent company and others, specifically cutting HR/MS Sheets. The Department alleged non-payment of Service Tax on job charges received. Both parties presented arguments, with the Appellants contending that Service Tax was paid on a receipt basis and certain amounts were wrongly included in the demand. The Department defended the impugned order, stating the need for verification of commission and trade discount details.

The Tribunal examined the Service Tax demand on job charges and commission, noting the dispute concerning the payment basis during the relevant period. It was observed that verification of actual receipt of commission and payable Service Tax was necessary. Regarding the commission/trade discount amount, the Appellants argued it was unrelated to the job work activity. The Tribunal found these aspects inadequately addressed in previous orders, leading to the decision to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the adjudicating authority. The Appellants were granted the opportunity to present their case afresh, including filing additional documents as per law. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed by way of remand, emphasizing the need for a thorough reconsideration based on the submissions made.

In conclusion, the judgment highlights the importance of proper verification and consideration of all relevant details in tax disputes, ensuring a fair opportunity for parties to present their case. The decision to remand the matter underscores the Tribunal's commitment to a just and comprehensive adjudication process, reflecting the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness in tax matters.