2014 (8) TMI 924 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre deposit - payment of service tax wrongly - Registration number inadvertently indicated in the challan - Commissioner(A), Noida dismissing this claim & rejecting appeal - Assistant Commissioner, Division-IV, Service Tax-II, Mumbai confirming that the amount is paid and the same is still lying in Mumbai unit account and not utilized - Held that - Payment of ₹ 25 lakhs indicated in the challan has been paid and the Government has received the amount of ₹ 25 lakhs as credit to their account. Thus, the government has received the money and the same cannot be demanded second time from the appellant - stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the payment made by the appellant can be demanded a second time by the government.
2. Whether the amount deposited in the Mumbai Unit can be adjusted against the liability of the Noida Unit.
3. Whether the issue is of an administrative nature.

Analysis:
1. The appellant argued that the payment of Rs. 25 lakhs indicated in the challan had been paid and received by the government, thus cannot be demanded again. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the payment but stated it had not been adjusted against the registration number. The Tribunal observed that the amount was lying in the Mumbai Unit account and allowed the stay application, considering the interest of revenue.

2. The appellant requested the adjustment of the Rs. 25 lakhs deposited in the Mumbai Unit account against the liability of the Noida Unit, as both units belonged to the same company. However, the Departmental Representative contested this, citing that such adjustment was not legally permissible under the service tax rules. The Tribunal noted that the issue was of an administrative nature and granted time for consultation before fixing a hearing date.

3. Both parties agreed that the issue was administrative in nature. The Tribunal, after reviewing the facts and submissions, including the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, found that the interest of revenue was safeguarded with the amount already deposited in the Mumbai Unit account. The Tribunal allowed the stay application and scheduled the case for a hearing to address the peculiar circumstances and the pressure from the Noida Unit for early disposal of the appeal.