Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2020 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (2) TMI 46 - AT - Service TaxBusiness Auxiliary Service - allegation that income earned as commission agent had not been correctly declared in their ST-3 Returns during 2004-05 - time limitation - Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - principles of unjust enrichment - HELD THAT:- From the very beginning, stand of the appellant was that he is not collecting Service Tax from any of his customers and as per the Notification, the appellant is also not liable to pay Service Tax but in spite of that he was made to pay the Service Tax which the appellant paid under protest. Further, the appellant vide letter dated 25.11.2005 written to Deputy Commissioner has stated that the appellants are remitting Service Tax under protest as the service recipients were not paying any Service Tax. This letter is sufficient to prove that Service Tax was paid under protest and once the Service Tax is paid under protest then as per proviso to Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the bar of limitation will not be applicable and further the appellant had also produced sufficient proof on record to show that they have not collected the Service Tax from their recipients therefore the question of unjust enrichment will not be applicable. The impugned order rejecting the refund on time bar is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|