TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 166
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ring the course of audit it was observed that appellant had made short payment of service tax under the category of "Management Consultancy Service" amounting to Rs. 10,30,000/- and interest applicable thereon amounting to Rs. 2,03,601/- during the period April 2009 to September 2009. Detailed scrutiny revealed that the appellant had charged service tax to the tune of Rs. 1 crore on bills raised by the appellant to M/s Adani Energy Ltd., on the taxable value of Rs. 10 Crores, which was paid @10%. However, the records revealed that for the value of the said services, half of services were provided prior to February 2009, when the service tax rate were 12%, according to which the appellant had failed to assess the tax of that half of value at....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Section 76,77& 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 were also proposed to be imposed. In adjudication, Ld.Additional Commissioner vide OIO dtd. 27.05.2013 confirmed the demand alongwith interest and penalties. Being aggrieved, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide impugned order partly allowed the appeal of appellant. He upheld the demand of differential amount of Service tax under the category of taxable services "Management Consultancy Services" and penalty under Section 78 of the Act confirmed by the additional Commissioner of Service tax while dropping Penalties under Section 76 and 77 of the Act by extending the benefit of Section 80(2) of the Finance Act in respect of taxable services provided under the category of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rovided prior to change in rate of Tax. In the present case, the service was provided prior to 24.02.2009 and invoice was raised and payment was received after 24.02.2009, and therefore, Service tax as applicable after 24.02.2009 (10%) is leviable. 4. He also submits that even though Rule 9 specifically provided that the present rule of POT is not applicable in a case where service was provided and invoice was received prior to introduction of point of taxation Rules2011 , there was no specific provision during the disputed period regarding applicability of rate of service tax in case where rate of service tax is changed. Hence, intention of the legislature can be drawn from the POT Rules. He placed reliance on the case of VigaynGurukul Vs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....10-11 is time barred because the same has been issued after 25.04.2012. 7. He further submits that appellant did not pay service tax at the relevant time since the chargeability of Service tax on renting of immovable property was sub-judice before various court. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Home Solutions Retails (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India -2011(24)STR 129(Del) subsequently upheld the validity of levy. The appellant thus on being pointed out by the audit team immediately paid the service tax alongwith interest. Since, the matter of levy was sub-judice, the department did not allege any malafide intention on the part of the appellant. In these facts, larger period of limitation ought not to have been invoked. He placed r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is no clear provision in Finance Act, 1994 as to the date with reference to which rate of tax is applicable for calculating service tax. However, this lacuna was removed by Point of Taxation Rules, 2011 by Notification No. 18/2011-S.T., dated 1-3-11 which was further amended by Notification 25/2011-S.T., dated 31-3-11. However we also noticed that during the disputed period service tax is payable only when value of servicepayment is realized. In the present disputed matter the appellant raised the invoice on 30.04.2009 and payment towards the services of "Management Consultancy Services" was also received in July 2009 when rate of service tax was @10%, therefore in our view appellant had rightly paid the service tax under the category of "....