Tribunal remands service tax case on reverse charge mechanism after authority failed to verify expense classification properly

CESTAT Ahmedabad remanded service tax matter involving reverse charge mechanism liability. Appellant booked legal and professional expenses under single head in accounts. Revenue assumed entire expenditure was legal fees subject to service tax under reverse charge. Tribunal found adjudicating authority failed to properly verify whether expenses were classifiable under taxable category. Appellant produced bifurcation chart showing major amounts pertained to CA, chartered engineer services not liable under Section 68(2) read with Notification 30/2012-ST. Matter remanded for de-novo consideration requiring proper verification of books and expense classification.

---

---

Issues:
Interpretation of legal and professional expenses for Service Tax liability under reverse charge mechanism.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the classification of expenses under legal and professional fees for the purpose of Service Tax liability under the reverse charge mechanism. The appellant had booked certain expenditures under legal and professional expenses in their books of account. The department contended that since all the expenses were booked under this head, the appellant was liable to pay Service Tax under Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Notification No. 30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012.

The appellant argued through their counsel that the department had not properly verified whether all the expenses under the legal and professional fees head were indeed liable to service tax under the reverse charge mechanism. They submitted details of the expenditure to the adjudicating authority, emphasizing that not all expenses were subject to service tax. The counsel pointed out that in a previous period, the Tribunal had remanded a similar matter, indicating a lack of proper verification by the adjudicating authority.

The Revenue representative reiterated the findings of the impugned order, supporting the department's position on the liability of the appellant to pay Service Tax under the reverse charge mechanism for all expenses under legal and professional fees.

Upon careful consideration of the submissions and records, the Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority had not adequately verified whether the activities fell under a category subject to service tax under the reverse charge mechanism. Citing a previous order where a similar issue was remanded, the Tribunal emphasized the need for proper verification. The appellant had presented a chart showing a clear bifurcation of expenses under legal and professional charges, indicating that not all expenses were related to legal fees. However, this detailed bifurcation had not been submitted before the adjudicating authority.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal by remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision. Given the age of the case and the period involved, the adjudicating authority was directed to issue a new order within two months from the date of the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of proper verification of expenses to determine the applicability of Service Tax under the reverse charge mechanism. The decision was pronounced in open court on 06.11.2024.

---