AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1002
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re paying Service Tax on their taxable services. 3. As per the data sharing policy of the Government of India, the Income Tax Department apprised that the appellant had received a total amount of Rs.28,17,83,695/- during the period from 2012-13 (July, 2012 to March, 2013) to 2015-16 from different parties. However, upon scrutiny of the corresponding Service Tax Returns filed by the appellant, it was found that an amount of Rs.2,92,08,761/- had been declared by the appellant, on which they had paid Service Tax amounting to Rs.37,38,819/-, which was not in consonance with the TDS details, Form 3CD, Balance Sheet and Profit & Loss Account details of the appellant. On the basis of the information received from the Income Tax Department and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt service' and 'business auxiliary service' and paying Service Tax to the Department on the taxable services i.e., receipts by way of commission. It is submitted that the appellant is also engaged in the activity of sale and purchase of stone chips; for that, the appellant is issuing invoices and paying VAT thereon. He thus submitted that the said trading activity is not liable to be taxed for the purpose of collection of Service Tax. 6.1. It is further submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant that in this case, investigation was started against the appellant in the year 2015, for which the appellant had replied to the queries, which were made on the basis of the Income Tax Data collected by the Revenue, on 20.06.2015; whereas, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Year 2012-13 on 26th October 2015 as discrepancy mentioned in the Notice dated 12-10-2015 was only relating to the Financial Year 2012-13. Hence, a reply of reason of the difference was submitted, The Department never asked for any other documents after that notice and it was presumed by them that the matter is closed and hence they did not submit any other documents after that. (ii) They are dealing in supply of Stone Chips, Khalli etc apart from acting as C & F agent of Cement Company. Service Tax is levied only on the receipts as commission from the Cement Company. In the Notice, it has been presumed that the entire turnover as reflected in Profit and Loss A/c is only from service rendered by the assessee. But, the fact is that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Return it is Rs 58,79,807.00 and as Per Profit and Loss A/c it is Rs 8,01,67,406.00 In this Turnover of Rs 8,01,67,406/-, Rs 7,19,56,765.15 is from Sale of Stone chips, Khalli etc. on which service Tax is not levied, Rs 81,59,290.64 is from C & F Charge and rest is expense of Holi Conference amount reimbursed by company. Service Tax cannot be levied on sale or reimbursement of expenses. There is mistake in filling of Service Tax Returns of October to March 2014, in which Value of Taxable Service of Quarter October to December 2013 is written as Nil and also service Tax Paid Rs 2,81,556/-. Value of Taxable Service during October to December 2013 was Rs 22,77,965/- and Service Tax due on this amount was Rs 2,81,556/-, which was paid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or claim or Plying of Truck. Service Tax on C & F charge is already paid. Hence, there is no short payment of Service Tax. They also submitted the copies of Audit Reports, Form 26 AS, copy of Income Tax Return, calculation of VAT turnover and VAT Returns, for the relevant period in support of their submissions." [Ref. paragraph 10.0 at pages 4 & 5 of the Order-in-Original 02/ST/Ayukta/2019 dated 18.07.2019] 9.1. From the above reply filed by the appellant during adjudication, it is clear that the appellant had submitted copies of the Audit Reports, Form No. 26AS, Copy of Income Tax Return, calculation of VAT Turnover as well as VAT Returns in support of their claim that they are engaged in the activity of trading of sto....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g to suppression or wilful mis-statement. The allegation of suppression has been assumed without any substantive evidence on record. In fact, during the course of investigation, the appellant had duly filed their reply to the letters issued by the Revenue. Therefore, we hold that invocation of the extended period of limitation is not sustainable in the eyes of law in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Thus, the impugned demand deserves to be set aside on account of being barred by limitation also. 11.1. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the demand of Service Tax, along with interest and penalties, as confirmed in the impugned order is not sustainable. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside. 12. In the ....