TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1785
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ogy Media India Private Limited), Shri Sheshaiah Nandish Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax Bangalore, Union of India And Ors. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav For the Petitioner : Sri K. M. Shivayogiswamy, Advocate. For the Respondent : Sri Jeevan J Neeralgi, Advocate. ORDER In all these matters, the proceedings by way of show cause notice under the Finance Act for Service Tax liability have been initiated on the basis of inputs received from the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on the basis of Form 26AS/income tax returns filed. 2. Taking note of the order dated 03.07.2024 passed by this Court in W. P. No. 11154/2023 and connected petitions, the present batch of Writ Petitions are also required to be disposed of in light of the observations made therein, as the legal contentions are identical and would fall within the consideration as reflected in the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W. P. No. 11154/2023 and connected petitions. 3. The observations made in the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W. P. No. 11154/2023 and connected petitions, reads as follows:- "These petitions have been filed calling in question the action....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rth a proposed mechanism and made certain suggestions in the affidavit filed. The relevant extract of the affidavit filed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, presently holding charge of Bengaluru West and additional charge of Bengaluru East Commissionerate reads as hereunder: "I, Kiran Verma, working as Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, presently holding charge of Bengaluru West and additional charge of Bengaluru East Commissionerate, Bengaluru do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows: I am working as Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, Bengaluru West and holding additional charge of Bengaluru East Commissionerate, Bengaluru -560071. I am the concerned person in the above Writ Petition. I am fully conversant with the facts of the case. I am authorized to swear to this affidavit. 1. I submit that in the above batch of cases, the dispute is regarding the Issuance of the Show Cause Notice and demand of Service Tax made on the basis of information provided by CBDT (Central Board of Direct Taxes) as per the assessee's Income Tax returns. The Service Tax Levy is on the taxable services provided by one person or Entity to anot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red the cases and where there was no component of Service Tay dropped 21,549 such cases after detailed verification. Thereafter the department issued Show Cause Notices to the Assessee in the remaining 28,116 cases and called for clarification/explanation. The adjudicating authority during the course of adjudication, after providing a hearing opportunity to the notice, dropped the show cause notices in about 8,816 cases wherever the Service tax component was not found. The adjudicating Authority after providing reasonable opportunity and hearing opportunities proceeded to confirm the show cause notice by way of an Order-In-Original in a total number of 19,300 cases by following the due process of law and following the principles of natural justice. The department in further course of action has also recovered the Service Tax in 587 cases where the service Tax component was confirmed during the adjudication. 6. I state that there is no prohibition under the provisions of the Finance Act 1994 or under the Service tax Rules to rely upon the third party information that is furnished by the IT department. The information need not be confined only in respect of information provi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4,726 801 3,925 310 Bangalore North West 4,355 1,465 2,890 952 1,938 44 Bangalore South 12,120 4,447 7,673 2,340 5,333 99 Mangalore 3,632 2,847 785 490 295 - Bangalore North 5,564 1,928 3,636 1,629 2,007 9 Mysore 2,703 843 1,860 441 1,419 32 Belagavi 5,842 2,549 3,293 864 2,429 58 Bangalore West 4,336 1,083 3,253 1,299 1,954 35 Total 49,665 21,549 28,116 8,816 19,300 587 Summary of the same is produced below: Table-2 Sl No. Number of Cases Percentage (i) Number of references received from CBDT 49,665 100% (ii) Dropped before issuance of Show Cause Notice 21,549 43% (iii) Dropped after Show Cause Notice issued and adjudicated. 8,816 18% (iv) No. of cases confirmed after Show Cause Notice issued and adjudicated. 19,300 39% (v) No. of assesses who agreed to the department's contention and paid the tax liability to the exchequer before/after the issuance of the Show Cause Notice. 587 Out of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... notice. 10. The officers while disposing off the petitions to keep in mind the following: 1) Whether petitioners do not qualify under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994 ? 2) Whether services are covered under negative list ? 3) Whether services are covered under the exemption list under the Notification No. 25/2012- ST dated 28.06.2012 or under any other applicable Notifications? 4) Whether the person is liable to remit service tax in terms of Rule 2 (1) (d) read with applicable notification? 5) Whether claims are barred by limitation in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court? 11. It is also clarified that disposal of present petitions must not be construed as having adjudicated any of the contentions including jurisdiction. All contentions of both sides on merits are kept open. 12. Needless to state, upon conclusion of proceedings, if any of the petitioners are still aggrieved, legal remedies are kept open. It is also clarified that wherever, replies to show-cause notice have not been made out, the same may be filed upon matter being relegated as noticed above. 13. Accordingly, the follow....