TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 1012
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e are that the appellants are engaged in the provision of Taxable Services: ''Management or Business Consultancy Services", " Commission Coaching or Training Services ", and "Scientific and Technical Consultancy Services" and are registered with the department. On conduct of an audit of the records of the appellant, it appeared to the department that the appellants have incurred expenditure towards the Import of Services such as "CMMI Course Development Fee/CMMI Certified Lead appraiser per appraisal fee/CMI Institute per appraisal fee etc from CMMI Institute, USA" for the services received from them; However, due Service Tax was not discharged on Reverse Charge Mechanism. On being pointed out the appellants have paid Service Tax of Rs.2,72....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellants, learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dated 27.06.2023 upheld the original order. Hence, the Appeal No.ST/30389/2023. 3. Shri Sujeet Kumar Borundia, Chartered Accountant, appearing for the appellant submits, in respect of Appeal No.ST/30392/2021, that at the end of the Service Tax regime, they had a closing balance in credit account of Rs, 35,701/- which they have carried to CGST vide TRANS-1 filed on 21/08/2017.CBIC issued a clarification, dated 28/09/2017, declaring amnesty of not imposing penalty, for service tax defaulters, if they pay up service tax with interest. He submits that the scheme was notified after 15-8-2017, the last date for filing returns of GST; the appellants had no way to avail Cenvat Credi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under GST; the ST-3 Returns for June Quarter 2017 was filed on 14th August 2017 while the due date was 15th August 2017; the appellant waited till the fag end for filing the Returns for any notification from CBIC; further, the appellant was handicapped to file the revised Returns on the day of the notification as 45 days were already over; they have filed revised Returns on 20th September 2017. 3.3. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that they are eligible for refund as held in number of cases. He further submits that the issue is revenue neutral. He relies on the following cases: • Indo Tooling Pvt. Ltd.- Final Order No.50263/2022 dated 09.03.2022- CESTAT New Delhi • NSSL (P) Ltd. Final Order No.A/86639....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the case. The facts of the case are that the appellants have availed the services from CMMI Institute, USA and have not paid the Service Tax. On being pointed out by Audit, the appellants paid the service Tax. They were told during the adjudication proceedings that in terms of the Amnesty Scheme floated by CBIC, the appellant having paid the Service Tax of Rs.2.72,700, penalty can be waived if they pay interest. I find that the appellants are now claiming that interest is not payable as the notification was issued late. The appellants also claim that as the issue is revenue neutral, interest is not payable as held in the cases relied upon by them. On the other hand, learned authorised representative argues that unless all the provisions of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ise, Service Tax provisions, payment of interest is a corollary to the payment of tax and the liability is automatic. The appellants having paid service Tax and having not disputed the payment of the same, whether or not under the said Amnesty Scheme, cannot seek exemption from payment of interest. To this extent, I am of the considered opinion that the stand of the appellants is not acceptable. I hold that appellants are liable to pay interest on Service Tax paid in a delayed manner. 8. On the issue of rejection of refund (Appeal No. ST/30389/2023), I find that the appellants have paid the service tax after being pointed out by the audit. The Department argues that credit is not admissible in view of Rule 9(1)(bb). I find that ....