2015 (10) TMI 2037

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are as under:- Appellant is a trader having two outfits; one located in NOIDA and the other in Mumbai. Both outifts have separate service tax registrations. While paying service tax for the period April, 2009 to September, 2009 the NOIDA unit deposited Rs. 25 lakhs but in the challan by mistake mentioned the registration number of its Mumbai unit. After some time on realising the said mistake, appellant moved an application before the concerned authorities that it inadvertently paid the said amount by mentioning the registration number of its Mumbai unit and requested that the said amount be counted towards its NOIDA unit. The request of appellant was not accepted and the Show Cause Notice was issued demanding the said amount of service....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bility by appellant. (iii) It also cited Trade Notice No.,3/2014/ST dated 10.07.2014 issued by Commissioner, Cochin which had prescribed procedure for rectification of such mistake. 5. The ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, stated that the appellant is not having centralised registration and therefore such adjustment is not permitted. 6. We have considered the contentions of both sides. We find that in the case of KK Kedia (supra) CESTAT, in effect, has held that such adjustment can be permitted while in the case of Plastichemix Industries (supra) such adjustment is held to be not permissible on the ground that there is no provision for that in the service tax law. It is evident from the facts of the case narrated tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....its such adjustment. Further, as stated earlier, the issue is not so much of law but of a mistake of incorrectly mentioning the registration number in the service tax deposit challan. That such mistakes do happen is also evident from the fact that Commissionerate of Cochin issued a Trade Notice No. 3/2014 60 dated 10.07.2014, the relevant part of which reads as under:- "Sub: Ratification of remittances made against wrong accounting code and or wrong STC Code / C.Ex. Registration Number ' Procedure' Regarding. There has been number of representations from registered service providers/receivers and Central excise assessees for rectification of mistakes occurred during remittances of service tax or Central excise duty against....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....37, Central Excise-038 and Service Tax-044). 5. Service Tax has been paid against cancelled/surrendered registrations on obtaining centralized registration. In such instances, in order to ensure uniformity and to avoid hardships to the assessees, the following procedure is prescribed to be followed by the assessee and the field formations. Case 1. The assessee should represent (Through Range and Division) to the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, describing the mistake occurred/reasons for such errors along with certified copies of the remittance challans, ST-3 Returns for the relevant period and any other document pertains to the issue to establish the genuine mistake and to ratify the error. ....