2023 (12) TMI 679

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Rs. 1,08,20,414/- was demanded. The Appellant appeared before the Adjudicating Authority and submitted that they have not been given the benefit of 75% abatement while quantifying the demand. The Appellant has provided Re-conciliation statement showing that they are required to pay only 20,26,194/- for 2005-2006 and 6,16,831/- for the period 2006-2007 vide Page No. 45 of the Appeal Paper Book. They have also provided the details of Rs. 20,39,182/- paid as Service Tax along with interest of Rs. 15,79,196/-. They have also provided copies of the certificates issued to various transporters to the effect that no Cenvat Credit has been availed by them towards the inputs, capital goods or Service Tax. However, the Learned Consultant submits th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aid part of the demanded amount along with interest, the Appellant cannot take the stand that the balance amount will not be paid by them on account of Revenue neutrality. He supports the findings of the Lower Authority. 7. Heard both sides and perused the Appeal papers and documentary evidence placed before us. 8. Admittedly, the issue is on account of Service Tax to be paid on RCM basis by the appellant. While quantifying the demand, the abatement available to them has not been considered.  9. The Tribunal in the case of Arani Agro Oil Industries, cited supra has gone into this issue and has held as under:- 4. We find that vide the orders of the Tribunal, relied on by the appellants, it has been decided that recipie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been issued on 03/03/2010 for the period 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. The Tribunal in the case of Kalika Steel Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE & ST, Aurangabad-2019 (25) GSTL 105 (Tri.-Mumbai) has held as under:- 10. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the Learned Authorized Representative and perused the records. The facts narrated above are not under dispute. Firstly, the notification is concessional notification. Unlike in Central Excise law wherein the unconditional notification should be  mandatorily availed by the assessee, similar provision is not available in service tax. Therefore, it is open for the assessee whether to avail the abatement provided under notification or to pay service tax on GTA on the 100% amoun....