9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f and holding against them, the plea of limitation would not be available to any assessee, inasmuch as the Service Tax liabilities would arise only in those cases where the appellants are not registered and are not filing the returns. Coming to the bona fide belief of the assessee, there are number of factors which are required to be considered. As no intention to contravene the provisions of Finance Act, 1994 and of the rules made thereunder can be attributed to the appellant for the reason that even if they are required to pay Service Tax on the disputed service, in question, provided by foreign agent, the entire Service Tax paid under RCM would be immediately available to them as Cenvat Credit and collection of Service Tax from the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Service tax Rules 1994. as in relation to any taxable service provided or to be provided by any person from a country other than India and received by any person in India under Section 66A of the Act, the recipient of such service . The Appellant was issued show cause notice for demanding service tax amount aliongwith interest and penalty which was confirmed vide OIO dtd. 30.11.2011. Being aggrieved, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide impugned order upheld the order. Being aggrieved, the appellant have approached this Tribunal with the present appeal. 3. Shri. Paresh Sheth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Appellant submits that Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in confirmin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri- Ahmedabad) (iv) LG Electronics Pvt. Ltd. 2010-255-ELT -135(Tri. Mumbai) (v) Sai Consulting Engineering Pvt. Ltd. 2018-15-GSTL-708 (Guj) (vi) Motor World 2012-27-STR-225-Kar. (HC) 4. Shri. R.P.Parekh, learned Superintendent (Authorised Representative) appearing for Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned orders. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. We find that in the present matter Ld. Counsel strongly defended the liability on the ground of limitation. As regards the question of extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, the same would not be available to the Department on the ground of revenue neutrality. We are of the view that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvice, in question, provided by foreign agent, the entire Service Tax paid under RCM would be immediately available to them as Cenvat Credit and collection of Service Tax from the appellant would be a revenue neutral exercise. We find that Larger Bench of the Tribunal in case of Jay Yushin Ltd. reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. 718, has held that in such circumstances where revenue neutral situation comes about in relation to the credit available to the assessee himself of the duty paid by him and not by the way of availability of credit to the buyer of the assessee‟s manufactured goods, longer limitation period under proviso to Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944 would not be applicable. The ratio of this judgment is squarely appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
