TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ability on behalf of all their branches within this region – This registration has to be treated as centralized registration under Rule 4 (2) of Service Tax Rules, 1994. Therefore Rule 6(4A) of STR ,1994 would be applicable and Rule 6(3) would not be applicable – order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo decision – Adjustment allowed – In favor of assessee. - ST/1658/2010 - ST/521/2011(PB) - Dated:- 19-9-2011 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Shri Rakesh Kumar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A., for the Appellant. Shri Sunil Kumar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Rakesh Kumar, Member (T)]. The facts leading to this appeal are, in brief, as under. 1.1 The appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owards the value of the services at his other premises or offices, he may adjust such excess amount so paid as service tax by him against the service tax liability for the subsequent period and the details of such adjustment shall be intimated to the Jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise within a period of 15 days from the date of such adjustment. 1.2 In this case it appears there was some excess payment during the period from April 2005 to September 2005, as in course of scrutiny of ST-3 returns for the period from October 2005 to March 2006, the officers found that the appellant had adjusted service tax amount of Rs. 13,95,399/- paid upto September 2005 against their liability for December 2005 - January 2006 period under Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consent of both the sides, the matter was heard for final disposal after waiving the requirement of pre-deposit. 2.1 Shri S. Ananthan, C.A., the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that it is the appellant s regional office at Delhi which had obtained centralized registration and was discharging service tax liability on behalf of all their branches within this region, that service tax registration of the regional office of the appellant at Delhi has to be treated as centralized registration under Rule 4 (2) of Service Tax Rules, 1994, that in view of this, the provisions of sub-Rule (4A) of Rule 6 would be applicable to the appellant under which the excess service tax paid during a month can be adjusted the same against the servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubsequently not able to provide the service either in full or in part and in such a situation, if he wants to adjust the excess payment against tax liability in some other month, he would have to produce the evidence that the excess amount of service tax calculated on pro-data basis alongwith the value of taxable service had been refunded to the customers. 5. Sub-rule (4A) of Rule 6 covers a situation where an assessee having centralised registration discharges service tax liability for all its offices located at different places and while discharging service tax liability for all the offices located at different places, there has been an excess payment and in such a situation this excess payment can be adjusted against tax liability for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
