TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 545
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x, Division III, Mumbai. 2. The appellant had entered into an agreement with M/s Nicholas Piramal India Ltd on 29 th April 2005 by which, in return for services, the appellant would be compensated @0.50% of turnover besides sharing in the expenditure incurred by the appellant for rendering services as per agreed proportion. The appellant is registered with the service tax authorities as provider of "management consultancy services." 3. The appellant had charged M/s Nicholas Piramal India Limited an amount of Rs. 3,00,80,21,300/- in accordance with the agreement for two quarters on 13 th April 2007 and 9 th July 2007 by issue of debit notes. The said amounts included service tax component at the applicable rates. It transpired that the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... amounts in the debit notes, and that corporate service charge" ledger and bank account show receipt of only Rs. 32950000 from M/s Nicholas Piramal India Ltd which, along with the basis for the renegotiated agreement, were not explained by the appellant. The impugned order has held the differential amount between credit note and the bank statement to be attributable to the service tax component and hence barred by the principle of unjust enrichment. 5. The learned Chartered Accountant, canvassing the claim of the appellant, reiterated the contents of the appeal and asserted that the ledger amounts would not match the debit notes or the credit notes owing to the statutory requirement to deduct tax at source for which certificates were produ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t such occurrence is recorded through the medium of credit and debit notes. It is apparent from the records of the instant case that the two entities are part of the same group and hence adoption of this mode of settlement is acceptable as sufficient evidence of compensation for services rendered. The charges levied from M/s Nicholas Piramal India ltd by the appellant are amply evident in the debit notes pertaining to the quarter April 2007 and September 2007. It cannot but be accepted that the credit note issued in October 2007 is intended to reduce the amounts payable by the client to the appellant to the extent of Rs. 2,93,50,000/-. The contention of the learned Chartered Accountant that any payment can be released only after withholding....