Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2022 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 1125 - AT - Service TaxRecovery of service tax - GTA Services - Rent-a-Cab service - applicability of N/N. 26/2012-ST dated 20/06/2012 - documents as produced by the Appellant with reply to the show cause notice, not appreciated - reverse charge mechanism - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- From the case records, it is seen that for the expenses incurred under the head motor car expenses, contains miscellaneous expenses for running of motor car including cost of fuel, toll tax, car parking charges, miscellaneous repair charges for car servicing, taxi fare reimbursement to staff whereas the ledger for Vehicle Hire Charges relates to the expenses in relation to the GTA services availed by the Appellant for the transportation of goods to customers of the Appellant. Further there has been no contrary evidence produced before us to deny the above facts. Also from the reconciliations produced, it is clear that the amounts as disclosed by the Appellant for GTA services in its ST 3 returns are much more than the amounts of vehicle hire charges and that there are other ledgers also on which tax has been paid under GTA services. The claim of the department that the amount under vehicle hire charges does not corelate to the amount paid under GTA services cannot be accepted as no visible efforts have been made by the department to corelate the same whereas the Appellant has produced all possible reconciliations for the same and on account of no contrary evidence being produced we are inclined to accept the contentions of the Appellant. Rent-a-Cab service - reverse charge mechanism - HELD THAT:- The demand was raised under the Rent-a-Cab service under reverse charge mechanism without actually identifying the supplier of service whereas the documents produced as part of appeal paper book and written submission shows the nature of expenses clearly not to be one of Rent-a-Cab service at all. Thus, the deeming fiction adopted by the Ld. Adjudicating authority cannot be sustained and thus, the demand cannot survive on this ground. As regards amount paid to Director for car hire charges, we find that the Appellant has not disputed the service tax liability on said amounts and that the same has been paid in the returns filed by the Appellant, we thus do not find any ground to make any observations on the same. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- The demand has been raised for the period 2012-13 to 2015-16 in 2018. No explanation has been furthered by the Department in respect of such gross delay in proceeding with the matter. Therefore, we find that invocation of the extended period of limitation is not justified. The demand for recovery of service tax on Rent-a-Cab service only on assumption and presumptions cannot be sustained is accordingly set aside. Since demand of recovery of service tax is set aside, penalty and interest are also not sustainable - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|