2019 (10) TMI 589 - AT - Service Tax

Service tax was paid under wrong Registration No. - whether could be treated as non-payment of service tax or not? - HELD THAT - There is no doubt about the fact that the Appellant had deposited the service tax. However, instead of depositing the same in their own Registration No., the same was, by mistake, deposited in the Registration No. of one of the Directors, obtained by him for his own Proprietary Concern. Admittedly, the said Director has given No Objection Certificate and as such the deposit made by the Appellant has to be treated as having been made in his own Registration No. In the absence of any dispute to the fact of payment of service tax, further confirmation of the same by the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be appreciated. The order of the original adjudicating authority is restored - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Incorrect payment of service tax under wrong Service Tax Registration No.
- Interpretation of Board's Circular regarding wrong use of Registration No.
- Imposition of penalty under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994.
- Appeal against the order of the original adjudicating authority.

Analysis:

1. Incorrect payment of service tax under wrong Service Tax Registration No.:
The appellant, engaged in video tape production service, mistakenly deposited service tax amounting to ?17,76,434/- for the period from July 2013 to October 2013 under the wrong Service Tax Registration No. The Deputy Commissioner referred to the Board's Circular on wrong use of Registration No. and noted that the appellant obtained a no objection certificate from the person in whose code the payment was made. The Deputy Commissioner imposed a penalty of ?10,000 under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994.

2. Interpretation of Board's Circular regarding wrong use of Registration No.:
The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the circular clarified matters related to tax paid under the wrong accounting head only, not tax paid in the name of another registrant. As the service tax was paid under the wrong Registration No., the Commissioner (Appeals) reversed the original adjudicating authority's order, treating it as if no tax was paid.

3. Imposition of penalty under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994:
The Deputy Commissioner imposed a penalty of ?10,000 under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994, considering the appellant's inadvertent mistake in depositing the service tax under the wrong Registration No.

4. Appeal against the order of the original adjudicating authority:
The Appellate Tribunal, after hearing both sides, acknowledged that the appellant had indeed deposited the service tax but under the wrong Registration No. The Tribunal noted that the Director, in whose code the payment was mistakenly made, provided a No Objection Certificate. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order, reinstated the original adjudicating authority's decision, and granted consequential relief to the appellant. The Tribunal emphasized that the payment of service tax was not in dispute, and the confirmation by the Commissioner (Appeals) was unwarranted.