Provisional service tax assessment and excess payment adjustment require finalisation before any conclusive demand is determined.

Where service tax assessment remains provisional, liability cannot be conclusively determined until that assessment is finalised. The Tribunal noted that an immediate demand was not sustainable on an unresolved provisional basis and required completion of the assessment process first. It also accepted that excess service tax payment made during the relevant period could be adjusted under Rule 6(4A) in a substantive, non-pedantic manner, and that the assessee should receive a fresh hearing before any revised order. The matter was therefore remitted to the adjudicating authority for finalisation of accounts, adjustment of excess payment, and fresh adjudication.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the demand could be sustained without first finalising the provisional assessment; (ii) whether the appellant was entitled to adjustment of excess service tax payment under Rule 6(4A) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and to a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority.

Issue (i): Whether the demand could be sustained without first finalising the provisional assessment.

Analysis: The assessment was acknowledged to be provisional, and the record indicated that finalisation of the provisional assessment was necessary before the liability could be rationally determined. The Tribunal treated the unresolved provisional assessment as a procedural bottleneck that had to be removed before any conclusive demand could be affirmed.

Conclusion: The demand could not be finally worked out without first completing the provisional assessment.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellant was entitled to adjustment of excess service tax payment under Rule 6(4A) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and to a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that the appellant had made excess payment during the relevant period and that the matter required proper finalisation of accounts by the adjudicating authority. It also held that the benefit of Rule 6(4A) should not be read pedantically and could be applied to afford substantial relief, with the appellant being given a fair opportunity of hearing before a fresh order was passed.

Conclusion: The matter was remitted to the adjudicating authority to finalise the provisional assessment and pass a fresh order after hearing the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the extent of setting aside the immediate demand determination and sending the matter back for completion of provisional assessment and fresh adjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: Where assessment remains provisional, liability should be determined only after finalisation of that assessment, and beneficial adjustment provisions may be applied in a manner that secures the substantive relief due to the assessee.

---