9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 994X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e parties.technical view that even in such cases where admitted wrong entries are made and are rectified immediately thereafter, an assessee is required to file refund application is to shake the assessee s faith in the judicial system. There is no error committed by the Tribunal while holding that the amount which has already been paid in cash to satisfy the demand of the revenue with respect to the service tax on GTA is fulfilled, there was no question of not reversing the amount paid from their CENVAT credit account - Further, the circular is dated 23-8-2007 and the period in question is March, 2006 to March, 2007, therefore the Tribunal was right in holding that the circular dated 23-8-2007 is having no application. The amount paid from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ken and ultimately it was held that the assessee cannot suo motu credit the amount in its account. The Tribunal ultimately held that in view of the Hon ble Gujrat High Court and Karnataka High Court judgments, the assessee was entitled to suo moto credit the amount in its account as duty cannot be paid twice and it was just the correction/reversal of the entries which was done by the assessee and there was nothing wrong in the same. The Tribunal, therefore, held the action of the assessee to be valid. 3. Aggrieved of the order passed by the Tribunal, the Revenue has assailed the order dated 25-3-2015 vehemently submitting that in view of the circular dated 23-8-2007, the amount with respect to the service tax for payment of GTA can be paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the month, the respondent made necessary, entries in the Cenvat Register and corrected the mistake. The Tribunal only viewed it as an arithmetical error which the respondent was authorized to correct. Insofar as the finding of the Tribunal that basic excise duty of ₹ 3.58 lacs was already paid by the respondent earlier and it was repaid while depositing the differential VAT duty was concerned, the Department has not raised any serious objection either in this tax appeal or before us through oral submissions. We therefore proceed on such basis. That being the situa- twai tion, all that the respondent did was to correct the arithmetical error by cau making necessary entries in the register even before filing the form at the take end of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sh to satisfy the demand of the revenue with respect to the service tax on GTA is fulfilled, there was no question of not reversing the amount paid from their CENVAT credit account. Further, the circular is dated 23-8-2007 and the period in question is March, 2006 to March, 2007, therefore the Tribunal was right in holding that the circular dated 23-8-2007 is having no application. 10. We are of the view that the order passed by the Tribunal is not required to be interfered with as the revenue's demand for payment of service tax on GTA has already been done by the assessee by paying the service tax amount in cash and, therefore, the amount paid from CENVAT credit account was required to be reversed. 11. Accordingly, there is no force in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
