Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2022 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 1228 - AT - Service TaxEnhancement of late fee/penalty levied u/s 70 of FA on the appellant herein from Rs. 16,100/- to Rs.83,100/- - delayed filing of ST-3 Returns for the period from April, 2009 to March, 2011 and October, 2011 to March, 2012 - taxability of clubs or associations services - doctrine of mutuality - HELD THAT:- The issue whether the services provided by the Housing Society to its members falls within the taxable net, came up for consideration before this Tribunal in the matter of TAHNEE HEIGHTS CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CGST, MUMBAI SOUTH [2018 (10) TMI 901 - CESTAT MUMBAI] and while discussing the principle of mutuality it has been held by the Tribunal that the activities undertaken by the appellant therein should not fall within the scope and ambit of taxable service, for payment of service tax. In the case in hand the penalty u/s. 70 ibid is imposed on the appellant for not filing the ST- 3 return on time. Section 70 ibid provides that “every person liable to pay service tax shall himself assess the tax due on the services provided by him and shall furnish to the superintendent of central excise a return in such form and in such manner and at such frequency and with such late fee not exceeding twenty thousand rupees, for delayed furnishing of return, as may be prescribed.” Therefore only the persons who are liable to pay service tax, have to file the return on time else they are liable to pay penalty. But as discussed in the preceding paragraphs applying the principle of mutuality, the appellants are not liable to pay service tax at all and once it has been held that they are not liable to pay service tax then section 70 ibid itself has no application. Although the appellants did not file any appeal before the 1st appellate authority against the imposition of penalty of Rs.16,100/- but now since they are in appeal before the Tribunal against the enhancement of the penalty to Rs.83,100/- [which also includes the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority] and have challenged the entire amount of penalty therefore I am deciding this appeal for the entire amount of penalty imposed on them. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|