Appeal Dismissed for Tax Liability Below Threshold, Section 80 AppliedMonetary limit involved in appeal - Non-discharge of tax liability - Held that: - the disputed tax liability is less than ` 10 lakhs and as per the litigation policy of the Government of India, the appeal stands dismissed.... ... ... Issues involved:
1. Service tax liability for various services rendered.
2. Confirmation of demand and penalties imposed.
3. Applicability of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.
4. Dismissal of appeal based on disputed tax liability amount.

Issue 1: Service tax liability for various services rendered
The judgment pertains to a case where the respondent was issued a show cause notice for a service tax liability of approximately Rs. 20.52 lakhs for services like BAS, Management, Maintenance and Repair Service, Goods Transport Agency Service, Manpower Recruitment and Supply Service, etc., rendered during the period from 01/04/2004 to 30/09/2007.

Issue 2: Confirmation of demand and penalties imposed
Upon review of the records, it was found that the confirmed demand of Rs. 20.52 lakhs was partially paid by the respondent, with an amount of Rs. 15.66 lakhs being appropriated. The first appellate authority confirmed a demand of approximately Rs. 5.41 lakhs and penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority. However, the appellate authority dropped the demand of Rs. 5.41 lakhs, citing that the tax liability was on bills for reimbursement of expenses incurred by the respondent, referencing a decision of the Tribunal in a similar case. The penalties were also dropped invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Issue 3: Applicability of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994
The first appellate authority invoked Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, to drop the penalties imposed on the respondent. Section 80 provides for waiver of penalties if the taxpayer proves that there was reasonable cause for the failure to discharge the tax liability.

Issue 4: Dismissal of appeal based on disputed tax liability amount
Given that the disputed tax liability was less than Rs. 10 lakhs, in accordance with the litigation policy of the Government of India, the appeal was dismissed. This decision was based on the threshold amount set by the government for pursuing appeals in tax matters.

This judgment highlights the assessment of service tax liability, confirmation of demand, penalties imposed, and the application of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, in a case where the disputed tax liability fell below a certain threshold resulting in the dismissal of the appeal. The decision provides insights into the legal framework governing tax disputes and the considerations taken into account when determining the outcome of such cases. Monetary limit involved in appeal - Non-discharge of tax liability - Held that: - the disputed tax liability is less than ` 10 lakhs and as per the litigation policy of the Government of India, the appeal stands dismissed. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Raigad Versus SRK Enterprises
Service Tax
2018 (2) TMI 1123 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI - AT
Dated:- 22-12-2017
ST/677/2011-ST[DB] - A/91773/2017
Service Tax
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri M.K. Sarangi, Jt. Commissioner (AR) for the appellant Shri Vinay Ansurkar, Advocate for the respondent Per: M V Ravindran: This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: US/221/RGD/2011 dated 29/08/2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai II. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records it transpires that the respondent herein, on being issued a show cause notice for the demand of service tax liability of approximately Rs. 20.52 lakhs for the period 01/04/2004 to 30/09/2007 for non-discharge of tax liability on various services rendered like BAS, Management, Maintenance and Repair Service, Goods Transport Agency Service, Manpower Recruitment and Supply Service, etc. On perusal of the proceedings, more specifically the adjudication order, we find that as against the confirmed demand of Rs. 20.52 lakhs, an amount of Rs. 15.66 lakhs paid by the respondent was appropriated. It transpires from the order of the first appellate authority that the respondent had filed appeal against the confirmation of the demand of approximately Rs. 5.41 lakhs and the penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority. The first appellate authority, in the impugned order, has specifically recorded the same at internal page No. 2 of the order, stating that confirmed demand is only Rs. 5.41 lakhs and the said demand was also dropped by him on the ground that this tax liability is on the bills which were for reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the respondent for which he relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Lafreight Lift (P) Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise [2009 (14) STR 513]. He also dropped the penalty by invoking the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. 4. As can be seen from the above reproduced facts, the disputed tax liability is less than ` 10 lakhs and as per the litigation policy of the Government of India, the appeal stands dismissed. (Dictated in Court)
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders