Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (11) TMI 350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. HELD THAT:- Service tax has to be paid by the person responsible to pay it. In the normal course the service provider has to pay the service tax. If a notification is issued shifting fully or partly the responsibility of paying service tax to the service recipient, the service recipient is responsible to pay the service tax to that extent. The undisputed legal position is that in respect of the services rendered by the appellant 50% of the service tax had to be paid by the service recipient, which it did. The appellant, as service provider, was required to pay the remaining 50% of the service tax, which it had not. If service tax is paid on a service which is an input service for a taxable service rendered or a dutiable good manufactured .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... be paid as per law. In this case, the liability of the service recipient was to the extent of 50% only and the department cannot charge anything more from the service recipient. The service recipient paid its 50% of the service tax. The appellant, as service provider, was required to pay 50% of the service tax which it had not paid. A show cause notice was, therefore, issued and the demands were confirmed with interest and penalty. Not only had the appellant not paid the service tax but it had also not filed any returns. The impugned order is upheld and the appeal is dismissed. - MR. DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT AND MR. P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Himanshu Khemuka, Advocate for the appellant Shri Rajeev Kapoor, authorised represent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d 2012-2013 to 2015-2016 for works contract provided by it. It was also intimated by service recipient that it had paid 50% of the service tax under reverse charge mechanism as it was required to pay under law. 4. It needs to be pointed out that the liability to pay service tax is on the service provider in the normal course except where, by a notification, the Government requires the service recipient to either fully or partly pay the service tax under reverse charge mechanism. The relevant notification in this case is Notification No. 30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, as amended by Notification No. 45/2012-ST dated 07.08.2012. This notification provided that in case of Work Contract Services 50% of the service tax should be paid by the service .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he service recipient, as 100% of service tax amount was deducted by the service recipient from the invoices but credit of 50% was being extended to the appellant and the demand of remaining 50% is being raised against the appellant, without taking into consideration that the appellant had never received the 50% amount of service tax from the service recipient. The amount was deducted by them from all the bills . It was responsibility of the service recipient to pay the entire amount of service tax and the appellant is not liable at all. The appellant had not received service tax amount from the service recipient. Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that order may set aside and the appeal be allowed. 8. Learned authorized representative ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... charge mechanism by the service recipient, it is the service recipient who can take credit of the tax so paid and not the service provider. Learned counsel has completely mis-construed the legal provisions in claiming that the appellant is eligible to claim credit of the service tax deducted by the service recipient . It has been correctly observed by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the service tax liability does not get extinguished simply because the service recipient had not reimbursed the service tax component to the appellant. 11. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that certain amounts were withheld by the service recipient in the bills of the appellant. Payment for the services rendered is a matter between the appellant and i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates