9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 684X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount in issue towards rendering any taxable service. In the absence of any specific allegation about the nature of service provided or the service recipient, it is not justified to held appellant liable for service tax. In order to fasten any duty liability on the appellant the department, in the first place, has to identify the nature of taxable service and the recipient of such service as well. Section 72 ibid cannot be applied merely on the basis of income-tax return without identifying the specific taxable service and the service recipients. By way of various decisions, it is settled legal position that a show cause notice issued on the basis of presumption and third-party information without examining the books of account and records ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... care to their patients including patients in emergency situation/ serious crisis situation. The entire case of Revenue is based upon the Income Tax Returns filed by the appellant with the Income Tax Department. On examination of the data provided by the Income Tax Department it was found by revenue that although the appellant has declared his income under direct tax but since the same was not covered under the negative list of services inserted in the Finance Act, 1994 vide Section 66D ibid w.e.f. 1.7.2012 as per notification no. 19/2012-ST, dated 5.6.2012, it was liable for service tax and despite that no service tax was paid by the appellant. As per revenue the appellant is providing taxable service but not obtained any service tax regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the appellant and learned authorised representative on behalf of revenue and perused the case records including the synopsis/decisions placed on record. Admittedly the entire case of the department is based on the thirdparty data received from the Income Tax Department for the F.Y. 2015-16 after which on the basis of best judgment the entire demand was calculated and show cause notice was issued after invoking the extended period of limitation. It is also admitted fact that the aforesaid show cause notice has been issued just one day before being barred by limitation. The same has been issued on 30.12.2020 because after 31.12.2020 the same would have been hit by limitation (or rather 'larger period of limitation') therefore while arrivin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner vs. Sharma Fabricators & Erectors Pvt. Ltd. Therefore in the present case also, the demand cannot sustain. 5. It is not borne out from the case records that the appellant had actually charged service tax from its customers nor it is the case of the department. The appellant was under the bonafide belief that he is not liable for service tax and therefore neither he applied for service tax registration nor filed the service tax returns. The appellant had shown the entire amount received in his incometax return and the tax liability under direct tax was duly discharged by the appellant. These facts establish that there was no malafide intention on the part of the appellant to evade payment of service tax. Information derived from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
