2009 (10) TMI 435 - AT - Service Tax

Double taxation- Demand relating to four branches of LIC. Demand assailed submitting Central registration in Mumbai and tax liability if any already discharged and that no jurisdiction of other authorities. Revenue submitting verification required. Adjudication order stating that Central registration sought in Mumbai. Held that- pre deposit waived and appeal disposed directing adjudicating authority to correspondence with Mumbai Service Tax Authority and consider plea of double taxation for self same service. Proceeding to end if authority satisfied that impugned service already taxed.

Summary

Issues:
Service tax liability on insurance premium received by branches of LIC, jurisdiction of authorities in case of central registration, waiver of pre-deposit, possibility of double taxation.

Service Tax Liability on Insurance Premium:
The appellant contested the service tax levied on the risk premium of four branches of LIC, arguing that as LIC is centrally registered in Mumbai, any service tax liability should have been discharged centrally. The appellant emphasized that the demand related only to risk premium of the specific branches and that the impugned order was beyond jurisdiction. The counsel requested a total waiver of pre-deposit, stating that proper information from the Bombay office would show the lack of jurisdiction for the impugned demand. The Tribunal acknowledged the central registration in Mumbai and directed the Adjudicating Authority to correspond with the Bombay Service Tax Authority to verify any potential double taxation. The Tribunal disposed of the appeals with the condition that if the services were already taxed in Bombay, no further proceedings should take place.

Jurisdiction in Case of Central Registration:
The Tribunal noted that the Appellant had sought central registration in Mumbai, which led to the decision to waive the requirement of pre-deposit and dispose of the appeals. It was emphasized that the Adjudicating Authority should communicate with the Bombay Service Tax Authority to investigate the possibility of double taxation and provide a fair opportunity for the Appellant to present their case. The Tribunal's direction aimed to bring the litigation to a conclusion by ensuring a thorough inquiry into the taxation status of the services in question.

Waiver of Pre-deposit and Double Taxation:
The Revenue representative agreed that double taxation on the same services was not intended but highlighted the need for verification to confirm the absence of double taxation in Bombay and under the present orders. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides and reviewing the records, decided to remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority, setting aside the impugned orders. The Tribunal's decision was based on the central registration of LIC in Mumbai and the necessity to investigate the potential double taxation issue to prevent unjust taxation.

This judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, addressed the service tax liability of LIC branches, the jurisdiction of authorities in cases of central registration, the waiver of pre-deposit, and the need to verify the possibility of double taxation. The decision focused on ensuring fair treatment for the Appellant by directing the Adjudicating Authority to investigate the taxation status of the services in question and bring the matter to a conclusive end.