TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 581X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax so paid by him (calculated on a pro rata basis) against his service tax liability for the subsequent period – in favour of assessee. - ST/437/2010 - A/419/WZB/AHD/2012 - Dated:- 10-4-2012 - M V Ravindran, J. For Appellant: Shri B N Chattopadhayay, Consultant For Respondent: Shri J S Negi, AR Per: M V Ravindran: This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No. 279/2010/COMMR(A)/CMC/RAJ, dt.5.6.10. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellant have paid excess Service Tax in May, 2006, Sept., 2006, Nov., 2006, Dec, 2006 and Jan., 2007 against their Service Tax liability and adjusted in the subsequent period i.e. October, 2006 to March, 2007 by taking benefit of Rule 6 (4A) of Service Tax Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r month on the said amount of Service Tax of Rs. 6,15,364/-under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 starting with the first day after the due date till actual payment of the outstanding amount of service tax. 3. Being aggrieved by the order-in-original that confirmed the demand of service tax liability, interest thereof and penalties being imposed by the adjudicating authority, appellant preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority after following the due process of law, held the order-in-original and reject the appeal filed by the appellant. Hence this appeal. 4. Ld. counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that there is no dispute as to the fact that the appellant had in fact pai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation and secondly he has not complied with the condition i.e. enumerated in sub rule 3 of Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules. 6. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides, I find that the issue involved in this case is regarding the adjustment of excess service tax paid by the appellant for the discharge of service tax liability for the subsequent period. 7. There is no dispute as to the fact that the appellant had paid excess amount as service tax during the relevant period. If that be so, the excess amount paid by the appellant should have been adjusted automatically. 8. In the case in hand, the appellant has explained that the amount of service tax paid excess by them was due to the reason that they were under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
