Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2024 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 139 - CESTAT AHMEDABADRefund claim - rejection on the ground of unjust enrichment - incidence of service was passed on or not - HELD THAT:- Even though the terms of inclusive of tax in the value is mentioned in the contract but the appellant have paid the Service Tax over and above the bill value, therefore, it cannot be said that the service tax paid by the appellant is included in the gross value of the service which was recovered by the appellant from the service recipient. This is further reinforced from the chartered accountant certificate which certifies that the service tax is nil rated or otherwise, the amount receivable from the service recipient is same. It was also certified that no separate recovery on account of service tax was made from the service recipient. The payment of service tax was borne by the appellant themselves and the same was not collected from the service receiver. It is also fact on record that as per books of account for the year 2013-2014, the amount of refund shown as service tax receivable under asset side of trial balance sheet, this also proves that the amount of service tax has not been passed on to any other person - the amount of refund has not been passed on to any other person. Hence, the same is not hit by unjust enrichment. The order of the Adjudicating Authority is correct and legal and the same is upheld. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not sustainable, hence, the same is set aside - Appeal allowed.
|