TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate is the date of receipt of the value of the taxable services and not the receipt of the Service tax from the service-recipients, as no obligation to pay tax is on such recipients - There are cases where the recipients pay a consolidated amount and not taxable value and tax separately - In such a case, as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel himself, the consolidated amount would be deemed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplication is accordingly allowed. 3. The appellants are not contesting the Service Tax amount which has been paid by them before issue of the show cause notice, and the penalties have been waived by the lower Appellate Authority. The challenge in this appeal is only in respect of the interest amount on delayed payment of Service tax confirmed by the lower Appellate Authority. 4. Shri S.K. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be no liability to pay the interest. He also argues that since the tax was paid prior to issue of the show cause notice, on that ground also, no interest should be chargeable. 5. Heard the learned SDR, Shri J.A. Khan who supports the impugned Order. 6. After considering the case records and the submissions from both sides, I find that there is no dispute that the appellants have paid the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax. The obligation is cast on the appellants who are service providers. A plain reading of the Rule 6(1), as it existed prior to 31-3-05, in the context of the objective of the law, clearly shows that the reference to the due date is the date of receipt of the value of the taxable services and not the receipt of the Service tax from the service-recipients, as no obligation to pay tax is on such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
