2019 (2) TMI 1100 - AT - Service Tax

Appeal granted on procedural grounds, remanded for fresh decision. Verify documents, ensure fair process.

M/s Sushant Kumar Mukherjee, Proprietor Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Lucknow

The judgment allowed the appeal by way of remand, emphasizing the importance of verifying documents submitted by the appellant and providing them with an ... Demand of service tax - appellant engaged in providing the advertising materials to the newspaper, print media etc. - Held that:- The Appellate Authority has, in principle, agreed that the order impugned before him was lacking in so many issues inasmuch as the Revenue itself has not identified the specific category of taxable services - The appellant, in support of their various pleas, have produced the documents before him, which were not produced before the Original Adjudicating Authority. The Appellate Authority should have set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Original Adjudicating Authority for verification of the various documents - appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues involved:Demand of service tax confirmed against the appellant for providing advertising materials, lack of clarity on specific category of taxable services in impugned order, failure to submit defense reply to show cause notice, lack of verification of documents submitted at appellate stage, appropriating amount deposited towards service tax dues.Analysis:1. The judgment addresses the issue of the demand of service tax confirmed against the appellant for providing advertising materials. The Appellate Authority observed that the demand was raised based on financial records like ledger accounts and bank statements. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the demand lacked clarity on the specific category of taxable services. The appellant did not submit a defense reply to the show cause notice and did not protest the allegation during the personal hearing. The Commissioner upheld the demand of service tax along with interest, as the evidence produced at the appellate stage was not verified by the department or authenticated by publishers.2. Another issue highlighted in the judgment is the lack of verification of documents submitted by the appellant at the appellate stage. The Appellate Authority should have remanded the matter to the Original Adjudicating Authority for verification of these documents. The judgment suggests that the Appellate Authority might not have remanded the matter due to a view that the Commissioner (Appeals) lacked the power to do so. However, the Tribunal has the power to remand cases, and in this case, it was deemed fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter for a fresh decision, providing the appellant with an opportunity to present all relevant documents before the Adjudicating Authority.3. The judgment concludes by allowing the appeal by way of remand, emphasizing the importance of verifying the documents submitted by the appellant and providing them with an opportunity to support their contentions before the Adjudicating Authority. The decision highlights the procedural aspects of the case and the need for a thorough examination of the evidence presented at different stages of the proceedings to ensure a fair and just outcome.