Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2014 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 488 - AT - Service TaxDemand of Service tax - discrepancy in the figures in the balance sheet and service returns - Banking and financial service - Bar of limitation - Held that:- To invoke the extended period of limitation, the following ingredients are to be ascertained - fraud, collusion or any willful misstatement or suppression of facts, or contravention of any of the provisions of section or rules with intent to evade payment of service tax. In this case, the allegation against the respondent is that they have suppressed the material fact which was came to the knowledge of the department during the audit. After going through the facts of the case, I find that during the impugned period, service tax is required to be paid at the time of receipt of the remuneration towards the service provided. In service tax returns, there is no column for receipt, what the services has been provided and how much has been received for the service provided. Every service tax returns has to shown amount of recovery towards the service provided not on accrual basis. But the respondents are maintaining their books of accounts on accrual basis as per Income Tax and Banking Regulation. So these two documents cannot be clubbed together to ascertain the fact in the absence of service tax returns and there is no duty cast on the assessee in the Finance Act that he is to provide the details of service provided and service receipt during the impugned period. In these circumstances, I hold that there was no suppression of fact on the part of the respondent - Matter remanded back for computation of demand for normal period only - Decided partly in favour of Reveune.
|