Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2023 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (12) TMI 78 - AT - Service TaxExtended period of limitation - entire proceedings has been carried out on the basis of information available in Form 26AS of Income Tax department - Entitlement for exemption provided under Serial No. 12A of Mega Exemption Notification No. 25 / 2012 – ST dated 20.06.2012 - Revenue neutrality - HELD THAT:- The Service Tax Department has demanded service tax solely on the basis of the data provided by the Income Tax Department, which is the gross value as received by the Appellant. It is observed that the demand of Service Tax cannot be made solely on the basis of difference between Income tax return and 26AS Statement, as held by the Tribunal in the case of M/S KUSH CONSTRUCTIONS VERSUS CGST NACIN, ZTI, KANPUR [2019 (5) TMI 1248 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD]. The same view has been taken by the Tribunal, Kolkata, in the case of M/S LUIT DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CGST & CENTRAL EXCISE, DIBRUGARH [2022 (3) TMI 50 - CESTAT KOLKATA] wherein it has been held that the figures reflected in Form 26AS cannot be used to determine Service Tax liability unless there is evidence shown that it was due to a taxable service - thus, the entire demand has been raised beyond the normal period of limitation. In view of the discussions above, the demand of service tax by invoking extended period is not sustainable in this case. Entitlement for exemption provided under Serial No. 12A of Mega Exemption Notification No. 25 / 2012 – ST dated 20.06.2012 - Revenue neutrality - HELD THAT:- In all the cases, the services have been rendered to state Government authorities. The services rendered to the State Government has been exempted under Serial No. 12A of Mega Exemption Notification No. 25 / 2012 – ST dated 20.06.2012. The Appellant is eligible for the exemption as the services in all the above cases have been rendered to State Government authorities - In the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS M/S ANGADPAL INDL. PVT. LTD. [2015 (10) TMI 1844 - SUPREME COURT], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that where the situation is revenue neutral, no demand can sustain. Accordingly, the demand of service tax in the impugned order in respect of all the three agreements mentioned above are not sustainable on merit also. Demand of service tax on the services rendered to M/s World Vision India, I observe that they are registered as a Charitable Trust under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - HELD THAT:- It is found that 'World Vision of India' and 'World Vision India' are one and the same. Accordingly, the appellant are eligible for the exemption provided under Serial 13(c) of Notification No. 25/2012 – ST dated 20.06.2012. Thus, the demand of service tax on this count in the impugned order is not sustainable. The demand of service tax confirmed in the impugned order is not sustainable on merit as well as on limitation. Since, the demand itself is not sustainable, the question of demanding interest and imposing penalty does not arise and accordingly, the same is set aside - appeal allowed.
|