TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CESTAT Tribunal Rejects Revenue's Rectification Application on Service Tax Payment Dispute</h1> <h3>M/s Dhaneshra Engineering Works Versus Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Allahabad</h3> M/s Dhaneshra Engineering Works Versus Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Allahabad - TMI Issues: Rectification of Mistake Application by Revenue regarding service tax payment by principal contractorAnalysis:1. Rectification of Mistake Application by Revenue:The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD considered a Rectification of Mistake (ROM) Application filed by the Revenue regarding the payment of service tax by the principal contractor, M/s Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd. (PCTL). The Final Order No.71933/2017 dated 13/12/2017 had provided an opportunity for the Revenue to verify if the tax had been paid by PCTL.2. Contention of Revenue and Response by PCTL:The Revenue's contention in the ROM application was that M/s PCTL had informed them that they did not pay any tax on behalf of the appellant. However, PCTL submitted a letter dated 22.06.2018 to the Superintendent of Jurisdictional Range, stating that they had engaged Dhanesara Engineering Works for specific work and that Dhanesara was liable to pay service tax for the services rendered. PCTL clarified that they had paid service tax on the entire contract, including the part executed by the appellant.3. Conclusion of the Tribunal:After examining the submissions, the Tribunal found that M/s PCTL had indeed paid service tax on the entire contract, which included the services provided by the appellant. The Tribunal concluded that the Revenue's assertion that the part of the contract executed by the appellant did not suffer service tax was not established. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the ROM application filed by the Revenue.4. Final Decision:The Tribunal, comprising Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical), pronounced and dictated the decision in court, rejecting the Revenue's Rectification of Mistake Application.This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD highlights the issues related to the Rectification of Mistake Application by the Revenue concerning the payment of service tax by the principal contractor, M/s Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd. The Tribunal's thorough examination of the submissions led to the rejection of the Revenue's application, affirming that the service tax had been paid on the entire contract, including the services provided by the appellant.
TaxTMI 