2018 (6) TMI 330 - AT - Service Tax

Reverse charge mechanism - manpower supply agency services - liability of service tax - Held that - The service providers have discharged the entire service tax due for the services provided is not controverted by Revenue in the grounds of appeal in any form - In the absence of any evidence to controvert the factual finding that the amount of service tax due to the Government is discharged by the service providers, there is no hesitation to hold that the impugned order is correct and legal, and does not require any interference - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Appeal reversing tax liability confirmation on recipient for service tax under reverse charge mechanism.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Appeals), Nagpur. Despite the absence of the respondent, the appeal was taken up for disposal. The Revenue contended that the first appellate authority erred in reversing the order-in-original confirming the tax liability on the recipient for service tax under the reverse charge mechanism. The Revenue argued that the recipient failed to discharge the tax liability as required by Notification No. 30/2012-ST dated 20/06/2012, which mandates the recipient to pay 75% of the value of services received for 'manpower supply agency services'.

Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal noted that the first appellate authority had made specific findings that the service providers had already paid the entire service tax due for the services provided. The Tribunal observed that the factual findings of the first appellate authority were not contested by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal. As there was no evidence to refute the fact that the service tax was already paid by the service providers, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order, ruling that it was correct and legally sound. Consequently, the appeal was rejected, and the impugned order was upheld.

In summary, the Tribunal upheld the Order-in-Appeal that reversed the tax liability confirmation on the recipient for service tax under the reverse charge mechanism. The Tribunal found that the service providers had already paid the entire service tax due, as per the findings of the first appellate authority, which were not challenged by the Revenue. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the impugned order was legally sound and did not warrant any interference.