2018 (10) TMI 834 - AT - Service Tax

Short payment of Service tax - confusion with regard to discharge of appropriate service tax liability by the appellant during the disputed period - Held that - The appellant had submitted copies of invoices / bills along with ledgers for the relevant period - The authorities below have confirmed the adjudged demand on the sole ground that no documentary evidences were produced, in support of claim of actual discharge of the service tax liability. Such finding of the authorities below are contrary to the contents of the letter dated 21.08.2014 of both the appellant as well as the Superintendent (Appeals). The matter is required to be looked into afresh by the original authority for ascertaining the correct position regarding discharge of appropriate service tax liability by the appellant - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Short payment of service tax, proper calculation and discharge of service tax liability, submission of requisite documents, confirmation of demand, lack of documentary evidence

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI, the issue at hand was the short payment of service tax on a taxable service, leading to a dispute regarding the discharge of the appropriate service tax liability by the appellant. The department alleged that the appellant had not paid the full amount of service tax as required by law, while the appellant argued that it had correctly calculated and paid the service tax on the taxable service.

Upon hearing both sides and examining the records, the tribunal noted that the department had confirmed the appellant's failure to submit the necessary documents requested by the department. However, upon reviewing a letter from the appellant to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, it was found that the appellant had indeed submitted copies of invoices and bills along with ledgers for the relevant period. The tribunal also observed that the department had acknowledged the submission of these documents for scrutiny. Despite this, the lower authorities had upheld the demand based on the absence of documentary evidence supporting the actual discharge of the service tax liability, which was deemed inconsistent with the contents of the appellant's letter.

Consequently, the tribunal concluded that the matter needed to be re-examined by the original authority to determine the accurate status of the appellant's service tax liability discharge. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant with a remand to the original authority for a fresh adjudication order. The tribunal emphasized that the appellant should be granted a personal hearing before a new decision is made on the issue.