2015 (4) TMI 173 - AT - Service Tax

Denial of refund claim - refund claims of an amount paid by the appellants on a direction of the DGCEI - 'Construction of Complex Service - Held that - It can be seen from the above section 73(3) that the said section is not ambiguous and very clearly lays down that the Central Excise officer shall not serve any notice on the appellant if the payment which has not been paid or has been short-paid is ascertained by the Central Excise officer and paid before the service of notice, no notice requires to be issued to the assessee. The provisions of sub-section are very clear and if no notice is issued to the appellants under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, it would mean that the tax liability discharged by the appellants would be the tax as accepted and paid by him. In our considered opinion, when the appellants themselves had discharged the tax liability, there cannot be any refund of the amount as the issue is considered as 'closed' by the revenue authorities. - No infirmity in impugned orders - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
Refund claims for service tax paid under the category of 'Construction of Complex Services' challenged by the appellants.

Analysis:
The case involved three appeals disposed of by a common order due to the same issue and facts. The Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence officers directed the appellants to pay service tax for providing services of erection of 'Modular Kitchen and Other Services'. The appellants paid the tax, filed refund claims under Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, and later contended that they were not liable to pay the tax. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claims, leading to appeals before the first appellate authority, which also dismissed the appeals after a personal hearing.

The main contention was that the appellants were not required to pay the service tax, and the provisions of Section 73(3) were not applicable. The issue revolved around the refund claims for the amount paid by the appellants on the direction of DGCEI. The appellants had discharged the tax liability under the category of 'Construction of Complex Service (Residential)' based on DGCEI's direction and filed applications under Section 73(3) for closure.

The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and provisions of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. It was noted that if the tax payment was ascertained and paid before a notice was served, no further notice was required. As the appellants had already discharged the tax liability without a notice under Section 73(1), the tax paid was considered final. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the impugned orders rejecting the refund claims, stating that the issue was considered 'closed' by the revenue authorities.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned orders, upholding their legality. The appeals were rejected, and the orders were pronounced in court.