9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also claimed to have given an input that the assessee-Appellant had collected service tax from their clients but did not deposit the same with the exchequer. It appears that summons dated 18.06.2013 was issued but the appellant did not even respond; vide their letter dated 06.02.2015 in response to a second summons dated 23.01.2015, they appear to have requested for time to appear before the investigating officers; and it is also recorded that even on the date chosen by them also, there was no appearance not was there any response. This prompted the investigating officer to request the Income Tax Department to furnish income tax details of the assessee for the period 2011-12 to 2015-16. On verification of the said income tax details/returns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion Nos. 1/2006-ST, dated 01.03.2006, 26/2012-ST, dated 20.06.2012 & 30/2012-ST, dated 20.06.2012 along with service tax details. The Revenue was of the opinion that the appellant/assessee had short paid the service tax, which resulted in issuing a SCN dated 02.02.2017, proposing inter alia to demand the service tax under Rent-a-cab service and MRSAS, apart from interest and penalties, as applicable. From the documents placed on record, we find from the reply dated 09.05.2017 filed by the appellant to the above SCN, the sum and substance of the reply are as under: Para 1.0 They were under a Bonafide belief that since the services were provided to Educational Institutions, which are run as Charitable Trust without any profit motive, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rged the service tax collected the same from their customers and hence, the demand if any, was to be calculated on cum-duty basis in terms of Section 67 of the Finance Act 1994. 3. The Adjudicating authority appears to have considered the reply filed by the appellant in adjudication and thereafter, vide Order-in-Original No. 07/2018 dated 27.04.2018 has confirmed the proposals made in the SCN. Aggrieved by the demands confirmed in the OIO, it appears that the appellant filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority; however, the First Appellant Authority also having rejected their appeal vide OIA No.559/2018 (CTA-II) dated 30.10.2018 thereby confirming the demands confirmed in the OIO; the same has been assailed in the present appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se eligible for the same and for this, there may not be any separate claims by assessee since it is the duty of the statutory authorities to extend all such statutory benefits to the assesses. 5. In the light of our above observations, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the file of Adjudicating Authority who shall afford reasonable opportunities of being heard to the appellant and then pass speaking order as per law. The appellant shall comply with the above terms as well and shall co-operate with the Adjudicating Authority in the de-novo proceedings; since the matter pertains to the service provided much earlier, we also direct the Adjudicating Authority to pass a de-novo Order-in-Original within a period of 60 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
