Service tax abatement depends on service completion date, and later tax payment does not change the applicable notification.

For abatement under the service tax notification, the applicable notification was linked to the date of completion of service, not the date on which tax was deposited. The order records a prima facie view that services completed before 1-3-2006 remained covered by Notification No. 18/2005-S.T., and were not shifted to Notification No. 1/2006-S.T. merely because payment was made later. Since Rule 6(1) of the Service Tax Rules permits tax payment by the 5th of the succeeding month, the later deposit was treated as a deferment of payment. On that basis, pre-deposit of duty and penalty was waived pending disposal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for the purpose of abatement under the service tax notification, the applicable notification was to be determined by the date of rendering of service or by the date on which service tax was deposited; and whether pre-deposit of duty and penalty should be waived pending appeal.

Analysis: The order records a prima facie view that where the services were completed before 1-3-2006, the governing notification would be Notification No. 18/2005-S.T., and not Notification No. 1/2006-S.T., merely because tax was deposited after 1-3-2006. It was noted that under Rule 6(1) of the Service Tax Rules the tax is payable by the 5th of the succeeding month, so the later deposit was only a deferment of payment. On that basis, the requirement of pre-deposit was dispensed with.

Outcome: Stay petition allowed and pre-deposit of duty and penalty waived pending final disposal of the appeal.

---