2025 (12) TMI 1611

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er Section 78 and penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Section 77 of the Act. The rest of the demand amounting to Rs. 17,40,551/- has been dropped holding that supplies made to Special Economic Zone (SEZ) unit were exempted and on the rest of the supplies 25% of Service Tax was to be paid by the appellant on the services under partial reverse charge mechanism. 2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the appellant are engaged in the provision of 'manpower supply service' falling within the Finance Act, 1994 to Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd on payment of due Service tax chargeable on 25% of the value on partial reverse charge mechanism basis as provided under Notification 30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. The appellant were also provid....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....; and binding judicial precedents. 4.1 Learned Counsel further submits that due service tax paid though under PAN No. or earlier existing partnership concern in which the proprietor of the appellant was one of the partners. He also submits that the appellant has informed the department about the change in the constitution and requested for amendment, however, no response was received from the department. He also submits that demand was raised for the period October 2014 to March 2015, however, the gross amount for the entire year 2014-15 was adopted. 4.2 He also submits that the entire demand is barred by limitation as the extended period of limitation has been invoked on the basis on internal audit report and is also based on third p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue has submitted that the appellant himself is to be blamed because the appellant has been depositing the tax under PAN No. AMCPS8500P which is a proprietary concern whereas the appellant has been registered as partnership concern under ST-2 number ABCFS3669JST001/PAN No. ABCFS3669J. He further submits that the service tax has been paid under the wrong PAN number of proprietorship and that will not be considered as a proper payment of service tax. He also submits that the Learned Commissioner has given the benefits of deduction of service tax and reduced the service tax liability to Rs. 2,19,842, which the appellant is liable to pay along with interest and penalty. 6. I have considered ....