9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervice tax on a portion of the value of Provident Fund which was directly paid by M/s. GHCL Limited (service recipient; and that this component of Provident Fund must also have been included in the gross taxable amounts received. Revenue also noticed that the assessee failed to discharge service tax liability under the category of Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Services, to the tune of Rs. 2,09,59,265/for the period 16.6.2005 to 28.2.2007. 2. Subsequently, show cause notice dated 28.03.2007 was issued and after a due process an adjudicating order was passed on 25.10.2011 by the learned Joint Commissioner, Bhavnagar, confirming the service tax demand of Rs. 23,68,363/-; interest and penalties as specified therein, including penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pient to the Provident Fund authorities on behalf of the assessee, were remitted by the assessee to Revenue even before issue of show cause notice dated 23.02.3010. According to the appellant, the entirety of service tax and interest liability was remitted on 22.6.2009 and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to immunity from initiation of further proceedings, under Section 73 (3) of the Finance Act, 1994. Learned counsel also contends that even though the appellate authority had reversed the conclusion of the adjudicating authority that the service provided by the assessee did not constitute the taxable service of Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency service and consequently the amount remitted by the service recipient towards Provident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the clear provisions of Section 73(3) of the Act; and in the absence of any circumstances justifying invocation of provisions of Section 73 (4) of the Act, the order of the adjudicating authority as confirmed by the appellate authority, to the extent of imposition of penalty on the assessee, is unsustainable. The appellate order dated 16.02.2012 of the Commissioner (Appeals) is accordingly quashed to the extent but only of confirmation of penalty. The appellate order to the extent the primary authority is directing to quantify the extent of service tax liability on the quantum of Provident Fund for March 2007 to December 2008 is however confirmed. All orders, insofar as penalty components are concerned, are however set-aside. Appeal is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
