Service tax demand set aside as demands based only on Form 26AS data without evidence unsustainable beyond limitation period

CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside service tax demand, interest, and penalty. The tribunal held that demand based solely on Form 26AS data without evidence of taxable service was unsustainable beyond normal limitation period, citing precedents. Services to state government authorities qualified for exemption under Serial No. 12A of Notification 25/2012 ST, creating revenue neutrality. Services to charitable trust registered under Section 12AA also exempt under Serial 13(c). Demand failed on both merit and limitation grounds.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Limitation for raising the demand.
2. Basis for demand of service tax.
3. Exemption eligibility for services rendered to government authorities.
4. Exemption eligibility for services rendered to a charitable trust.

Summary:

1. Limitation for Raising the Demand:
The Appellant argued that the demand is barred by limitation as it was based on information from Form 26AS of the Income Tax Department, which is a public document. There was no suppression or malafide intention to evade Service Tax. The Tribunal found merit in this argument and referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Aban Lyod Chiles Offshore Ltd., which held that invoking the extended period of limitation is unjustified when all facts are within the department's knowledge. Thus, the demand raised beyond the normal period of limitation is not sustainable.

2. Basis for Demand of Service Tax:
The demand was based solely on the difference between the Income Tax return and the 26AS Statement. The Tribunal cited previous decisions, including Kush Constructions vs. CGST NACIN and Luit Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, CGST, which held that such differences cannot determine Service Tax liability without verifying the nature of the amounts received. Hence, the demand based solely on this difference is unsustainable.

3. Exemption Eligibility for Services Rendered to Government Authorities:
The Appellant provided services under agreements with the District Welfare Office, District Development Office, and Zila Parishad, all of which are State Government authorities. These services are exempt from service tax under Serial No. 12A of Mega Exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST. The Tribunal agreed with the Appellant, stating that the services rendered to State Government authorities are exempt, and even if service tax was payable under Reverse Charge Mechanism, it would be revenue neutral.

4. Exemption Eligibility for Services Rendered to a Charitable Trust:
The Appellant rendered services to M/s World Vision India, a Charitable Trust under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that "World Vision of India" and "World Vision India" are the same entity, making the services exempt under Serial 13(c) of Notification No. 25/2012-ST. Thus, the demand on this count is also unsustainable.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal held that the demand of service tax is not sustainable on both merit and limitation grounds. Consequently, the associated interest and penalties were also set aside. The appeal filed by the Appellant was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.

---