2021 (6) TMI 1036 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of service tax or GST - seeking for a remand for the reason that the disputes relating to the tax paid on the very same service are pending before different jurisdictional authorities - HELD THAT - It is seen that though tax paid is in the nature of service tax and GST, it is paid on the very same service. If the matter is adjudicated by a common authority, such authority would be able to look into all aspects and give a correct decision in the matter. Further, though they had sent a representation dt. 19.11.2019 to the Principal Chief Commissioner to provide clarity as to which jurisdiction would apply for refund in their case, they have not received any response till date - it is seen that appellant had paid both service tax as well as GST. This has occurred during the transition period to new tax regime of GST. As abundant caution they have made such claim of refund as paid by the earlier company as well as the Merged/new Company of TVS Logistics Services. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order OIA No.103/2020 dt. 15.12.2020 has also been at confusion to resolve the issue and has remanded the matter to be kept pending till the appeals pending before CESTAT are decided. In the present case, without appointing a common authority for adjudication of these refund claims, the matter cannot be resolved since tax is paid under two different tax laws, i.e. Finance Act, 1994 and G.S.T. Act, 2017. Taking note of this fact, in the interest of justice, the Principal Chief Commissioner of GST and Central Excise of Tamil Nadu is directed to nominate a common adjudicating authority for denovo-processing of all these three refund claims. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claims under service tax and GST, jurisdictional authority for refund, remand for common adjudication.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to multiple appeals concerning refund claims under service tax and GST, all related to the same issue. The appellant, a company that underwent a takeover, paid tax twice on the same service - once under service tax and later under GST. The appellant sought refund but faced rejections from different jurisdictional authorities. The counsel argued for a common authority to adjudicate the matter comprehensively. The Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the case due to confusion and pending appeals. The Tribunal acknowledged the complexity arising from tax payments under different laws and directed the Principal Chief Commissioner to appoint a common adjudicating authority for all refund claims to ensure justice and prevent abuse of process. The appeals were allowed by remand with this direction.

The key contention in the judgment revolves around the need for a common authority to address refund claims involving tax payments under both service tax and GST laws. The Tribunal recognized the challenges arising from the transition period to the new tax regime and the confusion regarding jurisdiction for refund. The judgment emphasizes the importance of resolving the issue comprehensively and ensuring justice by appointing a single adjudicating authority to handle all related refund claims. This approach aims to prevent abuse of process and streamline the adjudication process for the benefit of the appellant.

The judgment delves into the specifics of the appellant's case, highlighting the payment of tax under service tax and GST for the same service due to the takeover scenario. The Tribunal considered the representations made by the appellant, the responses received, and the remand orders issued by the Commissioner (Appeals). The decision to appoint a common adjudicating authority stems from the need to address the complexity of the case, the overlapping tax payments, and the pending appeals. By directing the Principal Chief Commissioner to nominate a single authority for denovo-processing of all refund claims, the Tribunal aims to ensure a fair and just resolution while upholding the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness.

In conclusion, the judgment underscores the importance of a systematic and comprehensive approach to adjudicating refund claims involving tax payments under different laws. By ordering a remand with the direction to appoint a common adjudicating authority, the Tribunal seeks to streamline the process, prevent potential abuse, and facilitate a just and efficient resolution of the appellant's refund claims related to service tax and GST.