2023 (6) TMI 1244 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of excess service tax paid - HELD THAT - As regard the appellant s submission that the amount of Rs. 39, 46,367/- is not payable for various reasons has not been considered by the lower authority. Therefore, this matter needs to be remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority for re- quantification of the demand after considering the submission of the appellant. The Adjudicating Authority also needs to look into the aspect of larger period of demand and imposition of penalty under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against Order-In-Original confirming service tax as well as interest and penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Summary:
The appeal was filed against an Order-In-Original confirming a differential service tax on "Erection Service", "Pipeline Service", and "Supply of Manpower Service", along with interest and penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant claimed an excess payment of Rs. 39,46,637, making their liability Rs. 35,74,366. The appellant argued that certain amounts of service tax were not payable and that the larger period of limitation was wrongly invoked. The Deputy Commissioner for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned order.

The Tribunal considered both sides' submissions and the records. It found the admitted demand of Rs. 35,74,366 to be sustainable on merit. However, the appellant's claim that Rs. 39,46,367 was not payable for various reasons was not addressed by the lower authority. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority for re-quantification of the demand and to review the larger period of demand and the imposition of penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was allowed by way of remand to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh order.