2025 (6) TMI 457

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m Rs.14,02,765/- to Rs.5,13,223/- along with interest and penalties under Sections 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in in providing Rent-a-Cab service and is registered with the Service Tax Department under the category of Rent-a-Cab services. The issue involved in the present case is that on the basis of third party data received from the Income Tax Department, it was found that there was a mis-match in the gross amount declared in the ITR/TDS Returns from the services vis-à-vis Service Tax Returns for the corresponding period filed by the appellant. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant for non-payment of service tax of Rs.14,02....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vailable on Rent-a-Cab service i.e. service of renting of any motor vehicle designed to carry passengers. He further submits that the appellant is liable to pay service tax only on 40% of the value of Rent-a-Cab service. He also submits that the abatement is subject to the condition that the Cenvat Credit on inputs, capital goods and input services, used for providing the taxable service, has not been taken under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and if the service provider avail Cenvat Credit on any input, capital goods or input service, used for providing Rent-a-Cab service, then abatement is not available. 5. On the other hand, the learned Authorized Representative for the department has filed the written submission, which h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e conditional aspect to avail the benefit of the above notification; the appellant has simply stated that he has not availed any Cenvat Credit; consequently, the appellant was not entitled to benefit of abatement. 7. Further, I find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals), after going through the financial report, has only confirmed the demand of Rs.5,13,223/- along with interest and penalties. Further, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the appellant has not proved on record that he has not availed the Cenvat Credit on input, capital goods or input services, which is a condition precedent to avail the abatement under Notification No. 26/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. I find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has given ....