TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 332
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inghee Road, Kolkata - 700 071 (hereinafter referred to as the "appellant"), a Show Cause cum Demand Notice under C.No. V(15)210/ST-Adjn/Commr/12/24509 dated 16.10.2012 was issued to the appellant demanding Service Tax of Rs.51,94,915/- alleging short payment of Service Tax by the appellant during the Financial Years 2007-08 to 2011-12. 1.1. The said notice was adjudicated by the Ld. Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata vide the Order-in-Original No. 09/Comm/ST/KOL/2014-15 dated 22.05.2014 wherein Service Tax demand of Rs.50,93,353/-, along with interest, was confirmed and a penalty equal to the tax demand confirmed was also imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 1.2. Aggrieved against the confirmation of the said demands,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Inspection & Certification Service Amount (Rs.) 1 2007-08 +14,90,907.00 2 2008-09 -13,35,278.00 3 2009-10 -2,81,496.00 4 2010-11 -17,90,332.00 5 2011-12 +61,340.00 Total -18,54,859.00 2.2. Regarding the balance amount of Rs.18,54,859/-, the appellant submits that they have amount received prior 31.3.2003 has been written off the amounts received prior to 31.03.2003 in the year 2010-11. However, the written off amount has been considered as income for the year and tax on the same has been demanded. Service tax on the written off amount of Rs. 1,75,55,398/- is worked out to Rs. 18,08,206.00. 2.3. The appellant also submits that they have claimed CENVAT Credit amounting to R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ongly considered to be a service rendered by the appellant (Kolkata branch). Therefore, the appellant submits that it has been wrongly understood that the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax on the export of service from India to Japan, whereas the actual service is rendered by their Japan Branch to their Indian client namely, MMTC; hence, Service Tax, if any payable, will be payable by the recipient viz. M/s. MMTC Limited under reverse charge mechanism. Therefore, the appellant contends that the demand confirmed in the impugned order on this count is not sustainable. 4. Regarding the demand of Service Tax of Rs.8,17,482/- on account of non-inclusion of electricity charges collected from the tenants in the taxable value, the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d is not sustainable on the ground of limitation also. 8. On the other hand, the Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 9. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 10. We observe that the Service Tax amounting to Rs.50,93,353/- has been confirmed on various counts in the impugned order. 10.1. Regarding the demand of Service Tax of Rs.34,07,106/- confirmed under the category of 'technical inspection and certification service', we find that the appellant has made excess payment during the years 2007-08 and 2011-12 and short payment during the years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. However, we note that the Department has only taken into account the short payment made and ig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... adjudicating authority for the purpose of verification of availability of CENVAT Credit of Rs.9,52,922/- in the Return filed by them for the year 2010-11 and Rs.2,82,208/- in the Return filed by them for the year 2011-12. If the credit is available, then the same would be available to the appellant to make the payment. We also observe that no service tax is payable by the appellant on the amount of Rs. 1,75,55,398/- written off by the appellant, as the appellant has not received this amount. We observe that till 01.04.2011, service tax is payable on receipt basis. No service tax is payable, if it is established that the amount is not received prior to 01.04.2011. In the present case, since the appellant has written off an amount of Rs.1,75....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on maintenance charges collected from tenants, we find that the appellant have accepted this liability and already paid the tax. Thus, the amount paid by the appellant is to be appropriated against this liability. 10.5. Regarding the Service Tax liability of Rs.2,90,348/- confirmed, it is the submission of the appellant that the said demand has been wrongly calculated and that the correct liability would be Rs.1,60,316/-, which they claimed to have deposited. In this regard, the appellant has submitted a CA certificate which needs to be considered and the liability of service tax on this count needs to be re-worked on the basis of the CA certificate. As the appellant has questioned the calculation of Service Tax liability, we are of the ....