9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 233X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovider paid the remaining 50%; thus, whatever is due to ceaser has reached his hands, is true; in fact, the CBEC vide Circular No. 341/18/2004 had clarified that the reverse charge mechanism should not lead to double taxation; in other words, once the tax liability is discharged regardless of the persons who discharge, the Assessee cannot be asked to pay the tax again. the Settlement Commission has to keep in mind the recommendation of The Wanchoo Committee that if the tax payer takes the initiative and voluntarily discloses the facts of his alleged deviations to their full extent, he should not be subjected to criminal proceedings and that pecuniary settlement should put the matter to rest. The High Courts of Bombay, Gujrat and Punja ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have also been levied; further, immunity in terms of Section 32K of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has also been extended. 2. A number of issues having been addressed and settled by the respondent - Commission, petitioners challenge herein is confined to only two issues that were answered adversely to them resulting in addl. tax liability of ₹ 40,75,512/- with consequential interest thereon penalty of ₹ 50,000/- imposed on the first petitioner - Company and another penalty of ₹ 25,000/- imposed on the second petitioner - Director. 3. After service of notice, the respondents having entered appearance through their Senior Panel Counsel vehemently oppose the Writ Petition making submission in justification of the impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Exchequer, the Assessee could not have been called to make the payment once over; petitioners had availed manpower services and in terms of Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994, 50% of the tax due was paid by the Assessee and the remaining 50% was remitted by the service provider; however, w.e.f. 20.06.2012 vide 30/2012-ST, this ratio was altered to 75:25 upto 01.04.2015 between the consumer the service provider; further, it was changed to 100% qua the consumer w.e.f. 01.04.2015; however, inadvertently, the Assessee continued to pay 50% and the service provider paid the remaining 50%; thus, whatever is due to ceaser has reached his hands, is true; in fact, the CBEC vide Circular No. 341/18/2004 had clarified that the reverse charge mec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt has been paid or is payable by a person liable to pay service tax, service tax should not be charged for the same amount from any other person, to avoid double taxation The High Courts of Bombay, Gujrat and Punjab Haryana have taken the view that when the duty paid character and receipt are not in doubt, the credit cannot be denied relying upon procedural rules: CCE Vs. Gujrath Steelco Ltd., 2010 (255) ELT 518 Guj: CCE Vs. SL Cropack Ltd. (2015) 57 Taxmann.com 52-BOM: CCE Vs. Ralson Ltd., (2007) 6 STT 134 ; When there was no dispute as to receipt of the inputs/services or the genuineness of the claim, the Settlement Commission could not have refused to admit the photostat copies of the documents; petitioners are ready will ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
