2018 (12) TMI 262

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty service and availing of manpower service, appellant had failed to discharge service tax liability under the reverse charge mechanism introduced vide Notification 30/2012 and on being pointed out by the Audit team it had discharged the entire tax liability along with interest payable on those three components of service. But as it had not voluntarily paid the penalty of 15% along with the duty liability, it was put to show-cause notices and before receipt of reply to showcause and without the appellant being heard in person, adjudicating authority i.e. Assistant Commissioner, Service tax, VII Mumbai vide three adjudication proceedings confirmed the duty liability, interest and penalty by holding the extended period clause applicable to th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e receiver of service has not collected any service tax and withheld the same for deposit for which he prays for dismissal of the order of Commissioner (Appeals). He relied upon the case laws reported in 2017 (346) ELT 378 (Kar.) Jindal Vijayanagar Steel Ltd., 2014 (36) STR J188 Comm vs. Manipal Country, 2012 (28) STR J151 Commissioner vs. U.B. Engineering Ltd., 2018 (5) TMI 484- CESTAT Mercedes Benz India Pvt. Ltd. etc. 4. In response to such submissions, ld. AR for the department supported the reasoning and rationality of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and in placing reliance on the judgment reported in 2017 (346) ELT 378 (Kar.). Ld. AR further submitted that in any case of default on payment of duty, penalty has to be p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....not availed the gap period to obtain copy of audit report(wrongly noted as OIO). However, it is found from the show-cause and during the description of the fact by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) that appellant had failed to discharge the service tax liability. It is not understood as to why a person who failed to discharge the same cannot be equated with his ignorance to follow the new rule of partial reverse charge mechanism introduced by Notification no. 30/2012 w.e.f. 01.07.2012 and why the same shall be equated with suppression of fact and mis-declaration through ST-3. More importantly, neither the show-cause notice nor any documents relied in Order-in-Appeal and order-in-original, any reference is available as to whether the entire 100....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the service tax payable thereon inclusive of service tax payable by service provider. Notification 33/12-ST dated 30.06.2012 indicates that if the turnover of the service provider is less than 10 lakhs, the service recipient shall be obliged to pay his share of service tax (of the service provider also) under the partial reverse charge mechanism. There is no denial of the fact that the idea behind introduction of this procedure was to bring unorganised sector on record so that the proper books of account are maintained by them, even though they are not aware about the various statutory liability cast on them and the same will remove the difficulty of the government in tracing out the service provider who are liable to pay service tax. But....