2022 (5) TMI 10

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ered with the Department having Service Tax Registration No. AEMPS2728BSD001. With effect from 01.07.2017 when GST was implemented, the appellant was registered with GST regime and was granted new Registration number under the GST Rules. 4. Audit was conducted with regard to the affairs of the appellant after introduction of GST, for the period 2014-15 upto 30.06.2017. As per audit report F. No.1AR/179/KOTA/BR.10/2019-20/818 dt.27.08.2019, it appeared to audit that the appellant had during the period 2015-16 upto 30.06.2017, rendered taxable services as well as non taxable services to MES, but have not deposited the service tax on the taxable component. Accordingly, the audit calculated the service tax payable at Rs.10,61,694/-. It is fu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cognizing the pre-deposit of Rs.2,00,000/-, and amount payable under the scheme at Rs.4,24,677.60. In reply, the appellant submitted written representation in form SVLDRS-2A objecting to the estimate issued by the Department, in Form SVLDRS-2 requesting for adjustment of Rs.2,00,000/-, which was deposited on 02.08.2019 and also enclosed copy of challan on 04.02.2020. However, when the appellant appeared for personal hearing in response to prayer for adjustment of Rs.2,00,000/-, the Designated Authority under the scheme informed the appellant, that as the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- have been deposited under a different registration number. They could not get credit for the said amount under the SVLDR Scheme, and accordingly under the scheme the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dit report dated 27.08.2019. Admittedly, the said amount has not been adjusted in the adjudication - order-in-original dated 15.01.2020 and further admittedly the said amount was refused to be adjusted under the SVLDR Scheme. Thus, it is evident on the face of record that the said amount of Rs.2,00,000/- is lying by way of Revenue deposit and have not been adjusted under any head. Accordingly, ld. Counsel prays for allowing the appeal with consequential benefits. 9. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue relies on the impugned order. 10. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the appellant had deposited the said amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- on 02.08.2019 during the course of audit and the said amount has been reco....