2023 (5) TMI 974 - AT - Service Tax

Rejection of SVLDRS Application - rejection on the ground that while the Appellant has opted to take advantage of SVLDR Scheme, they did not Appear in the Personal Hearing granted when the Department has raised the demand for balance of Rs.23,002/- - HELD THAT - This is a peculiar case where the Appellant had paid the entire amount of confirmed demand of Rs.17,43,346/- along with interest of Rs.5,98,748/- and also had made some more pre-deposit at the time of filing the Appeal before the Tribunal. Under the SVLDR Scheme for the amount confirmed against this Appellant, mere payment of about Rs.6,00,000/-would have been enough to get the benefit of this scheme. The Department failed to note that at the very first stage they have paid Rs.10,00,000/- whereas only Rs.5,00,000 was appropriated in the OIO and also noted as deposited by the Appellant in the SVLDRS-2, because of which the Appellant was denied the benefit of the Scheme. As the Appellant is not contesting the Service Tax and interest and pre-deposit already paid, the same are not part of the present Appeal for the present decision. The penalties imposed are set aside. No further amount is recoverable from the Appellant. No refund accrues to the appellant - appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Demand of Service Tax for the period 2006-07 to 2010-11
- Appropriation of payment by Adjudicating Authority
- Appeal rejection by Commissioner (Appeals)
- Opting for Sabka Vishwas Scheme
- Dispute over further demand under SVLDRS-2

1. Demand of Service Tax:
The Appellant, a provider of Security Services, faced a demand of Rs.17,43,346 for non-payment of Service Tax for the period 2006-07 to 2010-11. The investigating officials collected cheques amounting to Rs.10,00,000 during the investigation. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand and only appropriated Rs.5,00,000 in the order-in-original (OIO) passed on 24/12/2012.

2. Appeal Process:
Aggrieved by the OIO, the Appellants filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) which was subsequently rejected. They also paid interest of Rs.5,98,748. The Appellants opted for the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, submitting that they pre-deposited Rs.24,37,344 under this Scheme against the confirmed demand of Rs.17,43,346.

3. Dispute under SVLDRS-2:
The Department considered only Rs.5,00,000 as the deposited amount, issuing SVLDR-2 demanding a further Rs.23,002. The Appellant disagreed with this demand in SVLDRS-2A. Despite this, no further action was taken by the Department, and the Appellant was not issued the SVLDRS-4 Discharge Certificate.

Judgment:
The Appellant, not contesting the Service Tax and interest already paid, focused on contesting the penalties imposed. The penalties were set aside, and no further amount was deemed recoverable from the Appellant. Additionally, no refund accrued to the Appellant. The Appeal was disposed of accordingly.