9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the refund application filed by the appellant is acceptable or otherwise. The issue of correct tax liability on the amounts retained by the appellant needs to be considered, then the adjudicating authority needs to reconsider the issue in respect of correct amount retained - the matter is remitted back to the adjudicating for coming to a conclusion after considering all the records that may be produced by the appellant - Appeal allowed by way of remand. - ST/31199/2017 - A/31291/2018 - Dated:- 8-10-2018 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Shri Sudhakr R. Challa, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri P.S. Reddy, Asst. Commissioner /AR ORDER PER: MR. M.V. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) ordered pre-deposit of 50% of service tax confirmed and deposit of 100% irregular input service tax credit taken. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the appellant was liable to pay service tax on the amounts retained by them and hence held that lower authority was justified in confirming the demand of service tax as proposed. The case for irregular availment of input service tax credit was remanded to the original authority to consider the submissions made by the appellant which had not been considered during the adjudication proceedings. The appellants reworked out the service tax liability for the disputed period on their own on extended warranty and paid an amount of ₹ 1,68,538/- alongwith interest of ₹ 2,14,706/- and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ranty extended by the appellant to various customers. He would draw my attention to various documents filed today, more specifically the ledger accounts of the appellants in respect of the extended warranty account and submits that appellant had transferred most of the amount to Hyundai Motor India Limited and only retained few amounts on which the service tax liability is ₹ 1,68,538/- and the interest is ₹ 2,14,706/- and penalty of ₹ 42,135/-. He would submit that this particular aspect is not being considered by the first appellate authority and the adjudicating authority and have wrongly rejected the refund claim as the appellant had deposited the entire amount during the proceedings itself on which the service tax liab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hyundai Motors India Limited but he noticed that some amount is retained by the appellant. In the said para, the first appellate authority has categorically recorded that the retained amount being attributable to extended warranty policies, the amount retained by the appellant is taxable under authorised service station services and appellant is liable to pay service tax on the amounts retained with applicable interest. This Order-in-Appeal dated 29.07.2013 was not contested by Revenue or appellant before the higher judicial forum. The plain wordings of the said O-I-A which was not contested by both sides, would mean that appellant herein is required to discharge service tax liability on the amount retained by him. It is also undisputed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
