9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 675X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee will be eligible for interest also. When the assessee opts for adjustment so as to eliminate the hassles of refund by foregoing the interest, strict interpretation and denying adjustment would result in unjust enrichment of the Revenue which can never be the intention of the Rule. Rule 6(1A) does not impose any restriction - Demand set aside - Decided in favor of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/85/2012 - Final Order No.30094/2016 - Dated:- 18-1-2016 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member ( Judicial ) Shri Karan Talwar, Advocate for the Appellant Shri R.K.Dass, AR for the Respondent ORDER [ Order per: Sulekha Beevi, C.S. ] 1. This is an appeal filed by Revenue challenging the order of Commissioner (Appeals) which set a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erest and penalty. Being aggrieved, the Revenue has preferred this appeal. 3. The learned AR strenuously argued that the respondents had violated provisions of Rule 6(4A) and (4B) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. As per these rules, when the assessee has paid excess amount the same can be adjusted in subsequent months, subject to a limit of one lakh rupees for a relevant month or quarter and are also bound to intimate the department about such adjustment. Out of the total excess amount paid of ₹ 22,75,932/- appellants adjusted in the month of April, 2008(10,00,658/-) July, 2008 (Rs.2,39,835/-) and October, 2008 (Rs.7,35, 439/-) and also failed to intimate the department about the adjustment made suo-motto. That therefore the origina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oses a restriction of rupees one lakh for a relevant month or quarter. The entire period of adjustment is between April, 2008 and March, 2009. 6. As per Rule 6(1A), any service Tax paid in advance can be adjusted against liability of subsequent period. This rule has come into effect on 01-03-2008. Further, rule 6(3) also provides for adjustment of excess paid service tax. In Nirma Architects and Valuers Vs CCE. Ghaziabad 2006(1) STR 305(Tri-Del) it was observed that Rule 6(3) should not be given a narrow interpretation by granting adjustment only in case of return of service tax to client. The Commissioner(Appeals) has drawn support from judgment laid in Mangalore Chemicals Fertilizers Vs Dy. Commissioner (1991) 55 ELT 437 SC where it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e lower authority that the appellants are eligible only for ₹ 3 lakhs for the months of April, 2008 July,2008 and October, 2008 in the impugned order under sub rule (4B) of Rule 6 of Service Tax Rules,1994. In this context, I draw support and reply on the plethora of judgments rendered by various Hon ble Tribunals. 8. The assessee is given a option to adjust the excess paid amount to future liability of service tax by the said rules. The assessee can also opt to claim refund of excess paid amount. In that case, the assessee will be eligible for interest also. When the assessee opts for adjustment so as to eliminate the hassles of refund by foregoing the interest, strict interpretation and denying adjustment would result in unjust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
