9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter on remand. Refund claim - excess payment of service tax - the appellant refunded the excess Service Tax paid to its customer suo moto and adjusted the same in the month of November, 2009 - Held that:- The matter is required to be re-adjudicated after proper verification of the records. The claim of the appellant that excess duty was paid in the month of April is required to be verified as also the claim that the said amount was paid back to the appellant’s customer and the same adjusted in November, 2009 - matter on remand. Demand of interest u/r 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules - it is the submission of the ld. C.A. that the credit has been taken only on the basis of proper documents and copies of such documents were produced be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cuss below the various issues which are the subject matter of the present dispute and decide them one by one. 4. Ld. C.A. submitted that certain demands amounting to ₹ 8,624/- as well as ₹ 4,40,954/- demanded in the impugned order, already stand paid by the appellant even before the issue of show cause notice. Such demands are not being pressed and he only prayed that the penalty involved may be set aside. We uphold the demands as above which are not challenged and which already stands paid. Since the amount has already been paid even before issue of show cause notice we find no justification to impose penalty. Hence, the penalty involved is set aside. 5. Ld. C.A. submitted that the department has demanded interest on c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to decide the issue denovo after verification of the relevant record which will be submitted by the appellant. 6. The next issue pertains to the alleged short payment of service tax amounting to ₹ 11,21,512/- during the month of November, 2009. Ld. C.A. for the appellant submitted that the effective rate of service tax was reduced from about 12% to 10% in the month of April, 2009. But the appellant discharged the service tax for the said month at the old rate of 12%. The customers subsequently brought it to the notice of the appellant, and consequently the appellant refunded the excess Service Tax paid to its customer suo moto and adjusted the same in the month of November, 2009. The Department has demanded the said amount by den ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
