2025 (4) TMI 1335
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 31.10.2023. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was into the business of Advertising & Allied Services and registered with Service Tax Department vide Service Tax Registration No. AAHC8547QSD001. They are regularly filing Service Tax Return and discharging their tax liability. Due to change of Auditor of the appellant company, they could not locate username and password to access their service tax login account, which is necessary to file Service Tax Returns electronically. Accordingly, vide letters dated 10.08.2017, 16.01.2018, 23.09.2020 and 28.01.2021, they informed the Jurisdictional Range Superintendent that they had already paid service tax but could not upload Service Tax Returns due to password problem and request....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Tax paid in CENVAT Balance payable 1 2014-2015 (2^nd half) 25,54,251 29,70,420 3,67,144 2,24,262 19,332 1,42,882 NIL 2 2015-2016 49,88,798 49,88,498 7,23,376 4,61,315 19,321 2,62,061 NIL 3 2016-2017 51,71,364 52,26,400 7,83,962 4,66,727 14,428 3,17,235 NIL 4 2017-2018 (upto 06/2017 17,35,000 17,34,800 2,60,250 92,220 4,991 1,68,030 NIL 3. Heard Learned Counsel for the appellant Shri Dr. L. Venkateswara Rao and Learned AR for the Department Shri Sandeep Kumar Payal and perused the records. 4. Learned Counsel for the appellant stated that Department relied on the third party data and issued a show ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eived. The income from service declared by the service provider in the Income Tax Returns filed by them for the period FY 2014-15 (2nd half) to FY 2017-18 (upto June, 2017). It was observed that though they had shown a total income of Rs. 49,88,798/- for the FY 2015-16 in their ITR/listed in the Form 26 AS, they had not paid service tax due on the total turnover during the said period. 6. Learned Counsel for the appellant stated that they are regularly filed Service Tax Returns, but due to change of Auditor of the company, they could not find user name and password for uploading the returns. Appellant requested several times vide letters dated 10.08.2017, 16.01.2018, 23.09.2020 and 28.01.2021 to provide user name and password. Inspite of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at Credit which was clearly beyond the allegation in the show cause notice. The service tax liability determined by the Adjudicating Authority for the second quarter of financial year 2014-15 and first quarter of financial year 2017-18 is Rs. 3,67,144/- and Rs. 1,68,030/- (aggregate Rs. 5,35,174/-) whereas the service tax confirmed for the said period is Rs. 8,52,409/-. It is clear that the order of Adjudicating Authority traverse beyond the allegation of the show cause notice. Learned Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals) confirmed the Order-in-Original without appreciating the facts which is gross violation of principles of natural justice. 9. The show cause notice failed to quantify the service tax amount purportedly short paid by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Service Tax-3 returns which happens due to change of auditor of the appellant company and inspite of several requests Department not provided login user name and password in time. Due to this reason, the appellant was unable to file returns for reasons beyond their control. In these circumstances, dis-allowance of credit to the appellant is not just proper and legal. The non-filing of returns is not intentional but due to password problem which is beyond the control of the appellant. Therefore, denial of credit to the appellant is not just and proper. 14. Co-ordinate Bench, Ahmadabad in the case of Sun Outdoos Vs CCE and ST, Vadodara-I [2024 (11) TMI 263 (Cestat-Ahmedabad)] wherein on the issue of benefit of Cenvat Credit on the ground....
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
TaxTMI