TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 914
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s on use of ERP software modules designed by M/s SAP India Pvt Ltd; also even though the appellant had received services from overseas service providers in relation to 'Management Consultancy Services' and 'Intellectual Property Rights Services', during the relevant period but failed to discharge service tax of Rs. 50,67,901/- & Rs. 20,01,291/- respectively, under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994; also, it is alleged that they have failed to discharge service tax of Rs. 1,99,748/- on Repair and maintenance services during the said period; also it is alleged that they had availed inadmissible CENVAT credit of Rs. 1,91,57,435/- and utilized the same in discharging their service tax liability. Consequently, show cause notice was issued to them on 01.10.2008 for recovery/appropriation of the service tax amount with interest and penalty. Two show cause Notices dt.05.1.2010 & 17.1.2011 were subsequently issued for recovery/appropriation of service tax amount of Rs. 1,43,05,818/- & Rs. 1,16,74,102/ on 'Commercial Training or Coaching Services' and recovery of inadmissible CENVAT Credit of Rs. 89,64,279/- & Rs. 74,07,147/- for the period from Aug.2007 to March 2008 and April 2008 to Ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t [2008 (10) STR 449 (T)]. 4. Further, he has submitted, the Learned Commissioner erred in disallowing the CENVAT credit availed on the service tax paid on the input services for the services received at various branches on the ground that no centralized registration had been obtained for their Mumbai office. It is their contention that payments of all expenses were disbursed from their Mumbai office and they do not have separate bank accounts maintained branch wise. Billing for taxable services provided as well as accounting of the same are maintained at their Mumbai office only. The service tax liability of all branches are discharged from Mumbai office. Hence, merely because they did not have centralized registration during the relevant period but obtained subsequently on 10.4.2012, itself cannot be a ground for disallowing CENVAT credit availed on various input service utilized in providing taxable output service. In support, the Learned Advocate refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. Dashion Ltd [2016 (41) STR 884 (Guj.)]. 5. Further, assailing the findings of the Learned Commissioner in confirming the demand ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llant has collected the service tax from the service recipient only w.e.f. September 2004 and paid the same to the Government. Therefore, invoking the extended period of limitation alleging willful suppression is untenable in law. The Appellant have paid the service tax belatedly and filed service tax returns belatedly. Therefor, there cannot be suppression of facts to evade payment of service tax. Further, he has submitted that since the issue involves interpretation ofrelevant provisions of the Statute , therefore, extended period also cannot be invoked. 7. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Learned Commissioner. 8. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 9. Undisputedly, the appellant has rendered services under the category of 'Commercial Training or Coaching services during the period from July 2003 to March 2009. They have taken registration for the said service on 25.3.2005 and thereafter discharged service tax with interest on the said service from 10.9.2004 to March 2009. The learned advocate for the appellant does not dispute the liability of service tax for the period from 10.9.2004 to March 2009. It is their content....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... confirmed the demand for the period thereafter, on the basis of a verification report received from service tax Commissionerate. Disputing the said demand the appellant has submitted that even though the disputed amount has been reflected in the balance it but since the same were subsequently reversed being not paid hence no service tax liability could be fastened on them. Further, it is their contention that the demand on these services have been confirmed by the learned Commissioner on the basis of a report received from the service tax Commissionerate, however, copy of the same was not passed on them. Therefore, both the issues requires reconsideration by the Commissioner after passing on copy of the report collected from the service tax Commissionerate to the appellant. 12. As far as the service tax liability on 'Management, Maintenance or Repair Service' relating to software provided to their clients is concerned, it is their plea that they have not received the amount in full towards sale and maintenance of the software and the appellant subsequently have written-off a portion of dues in the books of accounts. Besides, it is their argument that levy of service tax on 'Repai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the assessee." 14. There is no dispute of the facts that the accounts of all branches are maintained at their head office; and service tax is also paid from the head office. In other words, centralized accounting system has been operated from the Head Office at Mumbai where credit has been availed and utilized in discharging service tax liability from the Head Office. In these circumstances, following the ratio laid down Dashion Ltd.'s case, merely because the Mumbai office has not obtained centralized registration under the Relevant Rules, CENVAT credit availed on the service tax paid on input services which are undisputedly utilized by the appellant in providing the taxable output services cannot be disallowed. 15. The appellant has pleaded that since the issue relates to interpretation of law, penalty under any of the provisions of the Finance Act 1994 cannot be imposed on the appellant. Revenue, rebutting the said argument has submitted that even though the appellant rendered the taxable services under the category of commercial Training or coaching services during the period July 2003 to September 2004 but took registration only in March 2005. Also, the periodical service ....