2025 (10) TMI 1266

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ice tax evasion on the basis of third party data for the financial year 2015-16 (as received from the Income Tax Department) it was observed that in the year 2015-16 the appellant showed the sales/gross receipt (value of ITR) from service tax as Rs. 15,46,331/- whereas the value of service provided (service tax value) was shown nil thereby giving arise to difference value of Rs. 15,46,331/-. It appeared to the department that entire amount received by the appellant was towards providing taxable services and were chargeable to service tax liability under Section 66B of the Finance Act, 1994. Hence the Show Cause Notice No.40/20-21/8354 dated 28.12.2020 was served upon the appellant proposing recovery of service tax amounting to Rs. 2,24,217/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hi- Appeal No. 52708 of 2016 dated 13.06.2022. 6. While rebutting these submissions, learned Departmental Representative submitted that earlier appellant had not submitted any relevant document to prove that they were acting as pure agent. Further, going through sample invoices, relevant page of contract copy showing reimbursement of photocopy charges on actual but maximum of Rs. 200/- and bill of photocopy showing same bills on the name of Rajendra Dongle as well as their service receiver New India Insurance submitted with this appeal and TDS entry showing said amount under the head 194J (which is for fees for professional services) it is rightly held that appellant did not act a pure agent. Thus the case law referred is not relevant in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., 2006 need not to be excluded in taxable value of service. 8. The tax demand is confirmed for sole reason of lack of documents. However, it is observed that appellant had filed an application seeking rectification of mistake before Commissioner (Appeals) mentioning that all relevant documents were before him. However, the said application has not been decided by the Commissioner (Appeals). This observation in the light of above discussion is sufficient to hold that impugned order has been passed in sheer ignorance of the documents on record. It is clear from the documents that the appellant is entitled for SSI threshold exemption available as per Notification No. 33/2012 dated 20.06.2012. It is due to this reason that 'Nil' returns were....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Thus it is held that the appellant is wrongly alleged to have suppressed the material facts from the department regarding the failure to discharge service tax liability on the taxable receipts. The amount was well reflected in the financial records. I draw our support from the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay- 1995 (3) TMI 100; 1995 (78) ELT 401 (SC)  , wherein it is held as follows: "Section 11A empowers the Department to re-open proceedings if the levy has been short-levied or not levied within six months from the relevant date. But the proviso carves out an exception and permits the authority to exercise this power within five years from th....