2015 (3) TMI 790 - AT - Service Tax

Tribunal dismisses rectification application, upholding timely tax remittance; appellant's claim rejected.

The Tribunal dismissed the rectification application, finding the appellant had fulfilled its tax obligations by promptly remitting collected service tax. ... Rectification of mistake - Held that:- As regards para 4.6, in the said para we have recorded the contention submitted by the learned DR during the course of arguments. So long as the same is not disputed by the DR, we cannot delete the said para. Para 4.6 merely records the contention raised by the DR on the matter and is not a finding or conclusion drawn by the Tribunal - As regards para 5.9, in the said para we have given consideration to the various contentions raised by both the sides and thereafter came to the conclusion that the plea of the bonafide belief claimed by the appellant cannot be accepted. Thereafter in para 5.10, we have recorded that the appellant has collected service tax from the students who attended the various courses and have remitted the same to the exchequer. Therefore, the question for consideration was only making the payment under protest and nothing more and hence, the question of demand being time barred would not arise. - Rectification denied. Issues: Application for rectification of mistake against the Tribunal's order regarding service tax collection and remittance.Analysis:1. Rectification of Mistake Claimed by Appellant:- The appellant sought rectification of para 4.6 of the impugned order, claiming it erroneously implied non-remittance of service tax collected from students. Appellant's counsel argued that the order misinterpreted the situation, as they promptly remitted collected taxes to the exchequer. Concerns about reputation were raised, urging clarification.2. Revenue's Stand and Tribunal's Consideration:- The Additional Commissioner (AR) representing the Revenue supported para 4.6, emphasizing the lack of evidence for the appellant's bonafide belief regarding tax obligations. He cautioned against setting a precedent allowing challenges to department contentions through rectification applications.- The Tribunal carefully assessed both arguments. It clarified that para 4.6 merely reflected the DR's contention without constituting a final finding. The Tribunal upheld its conclusion in para 5.9, rejecting the appellant's claim of bonafide belief and affirming the timely remittance of service tax by the appellant.3. Decision and Dismissal of Rectification Application:- Considering the facts presented, the Tribunal found no grounds to modify its order. Consequently, the rectification application was deemed not maintainable and dismissed. The Tribunal's decision rested on the understanding that the appellant had fulfilled its tax obligations by remitting the collected service tax to the exchequer, thereby resolving the issue at hand.