9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1089X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER Per: Mathew John; The first applicant is a proprietorship firm with the second applicant as the proprietor. The applicant firm had worked as 'Recovery Agent' for loans given by different Financial Institutions. Such service was taxable under Section 65 (105) (zzzl) of Finance Act, 1994, w.e.f. 01.05.2006. However, the applicant-firm had not paid appropriate service tax during the period 01 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es similar to the name of the applicant-firm in States other than Tamil Nadu. He contended that the figures taken by Revenue from the Financial Institutions included payments made to others and that is why there was an bloated demand for service tax from the applicants. He further submitted that such erroneous confirmation of demand is demonstrated from the fact that the adjudicating Officer dropp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Revenue submits that the demand has been made based only on the payments to M/s. S.R. Associates, having the PAN No. AGDPR1623F, which is the PAN of the applicant and therefore, no value of service rendered by any other person, can come into this calculation. Further, he explains that the excess demand dropped during the adjudication proceedings in the case of receipts from M/s. Citi Financ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had accepted that from certain clients like HDFC Bank, Standard Chartered Bank, and GE Money Financial Services, the appellant had billed the service tax amount and collected it. He submits that after having collected service tax not depositing such money with government is a serious offence and therefore, entire amount of tax confirmed against the applicant should be called for as pre-deposit. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
