2025 (9) TMI 193

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al Company involved in micro-financing in Uttar Pradesh and other adjoining states. They are registered with the Service Tax Department under the category of 'Insurance Auxiliary, Banking, & Other Financial Services'. In the GST Regime, they are also registered with the GSTIN No.09AAECS9853J1ZO. During the Service Tax Regime, the Appellant was filing return under the head of 'Banking and Other Financial Services' & 'Business Auxiliary Services'. They were also discharging service tax liability under the category of 'Legal Consultancy Services', 'Rent a Cab Operator Service' & 'Other Taxable Services' under Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 under the Reverse Charge Mechanism. On the basis of third party data provided by the Income Tax D....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... amounting to Rs.97,84,954/- during the year 2014-15 against the liability of service tax amounting to Rs.95,57,228/-. Thus, the Appellant has paid excess amount of Rs.2,27,726/- which needs to be reduced from the total liability of Rs.24,41,935/-. 5. That the Appellant submitted that during the financial year 2015-16 the Department has calculated service tax at flat rate of 14.5% for the whole year, whereas the prevailing rate of tax was 12.36% from 01.04.2015 to 31.05.2015 and 14% from 01.06.2015 to 14.11.2015 and; during the financial year 2016-17 the SCN has calculated service tax at flat rate of 15% for the whole year, whereas the prevailing rate of tax was 14.5% from 01.04.2016 to 31.05.2016, resulting into excess demand of tax for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Appellant. There is also nothing in the Order-in-Original to specify as to which act of the Appellant was considered willful suppression of material facts with intent to evade payment of service tax. Thus, there is absolutely no allegation of suppression of facts etc. Hence, there is no ground to invoke extended period of limitation for demand of tax from the Appellants. In the circumstances extended period of limitation for demand of service tax is not available to the Department and, therefore, the entire demand is liable to be set aside being barred by limitation. 8. The learned Authorized Representative justified the impugned order and prayed that the appeal filed by the Appellant being devoid of any merits may be dismissed. 9....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hearing regarding service tax already paid on 'Service Fees' earned from services provided in Madhya Pradesh. It was submitted that service tax on non-exempted income earned as 'Service Fees' from the services provided in Madhya Pradesh had already been paid. This issue was already raised by the audit and upon finding that the objection raised by audit was correct, the differential service tax was paid and the issue raised was settled by audit vide their letter dated 11.05.2016. The amount of Rs.1,18,30,406/- forms part of the total income of Rs.8,02,08,227/- shown against service fees during the financial year 2015-16 and the service tax involved was paid and whatever was objected by audit was also paid. The issue raised by audit was final....