Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Publish Date: 14 Jul, 2014
Print   |    |  Comment

A CLOSE WATCH ON SERVICE TAX DEFAULTERS

A CLOSE WATCH ON SERVICE TAX DEFAULTERS

An article by:-
CA PRADEEP JAIN,
CA NEETU SUKHWANI &
ANKIT PALGUATA

 
The Government has enhanced the rate of interest to be charged on delayed payment of Service tax under Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994. This increase in the rate is based on period of delay rather a single increased rate for any period of delay. Thus, due to this change in the marginal difference in the rate of interest, interest recovered by the government will be high as compared to interest recovered before amendment. The increased rates according to the period of delay will be effective from 01.10.2014. It seems as if the government wishes to catch hold the service tax defaulters tightly because the service sector contributes to a substantial share in the overall revenue of the government. After giving the service tax assessees an opportunity to come clear by filing declarations in VCES and come clean, this enhancement in the interest rate for delayed payment of service tax depicts the intention of the government to keep a close eye on the service tax assessees.  
Glance at the erstwhile provision:
The Govt. had prescribed Interest rate as 18% for delayed payment of service tax after due date under Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994. Every person, liable to pay the tax in accordance with the provisions of the charging section or the Service Tax Rules made thereunder, and who fails to credit the tax or any part thereof to the account of the Central Government within the period prescribed, shall pay simple interest at the rate of 18% per annum, for the period by which such crediting of the tax or any part thereof is delayed.
 
Provided that in the case of a service provider, whose value of taxable services provided in a financial year does not exceed sixty lakhs rupees

  • during any of the financial years covered by the notice or
  • during the last preceding financial year, as the case may be,

 
such rate of interest, shall be reduced by three per cent per annum i.e. effective rate of interest will be, in this case, 15%.
 
Amended Provision:
The Government has amended the rate of Interest to be charged on delayed payment of Service Tax. The Government has increased interest rate vide Notification no. 12/2014-ST dt. 11.07.2014 which is tabulated as under-
 

S. No. Period of Delay Rate of Interest
1 Up to six months 18% per annum
2 More than six months &  upto one year
 
18% for first six months of delay, and  24% for the period of delay beyond six months
3 For more than 1 year 18% for the first six months of delay,  24% for the period beyond six months upto one year, and 30% for the period of delay beyond one year.
 

 
 
Further, this amendment relating to variable rates of Interest will come into effect from 1st October 2014. Also the benefit of 3% concession in interest rate is available to small service providers.
 
Conclusion:-
This amendment, of increasing rate of interest on payment of Service tax after due date, is definitely not good from view point of assessee because of the high rate of interest which will prove to be extra burden to the assessee. Further, as the Government has increased rate on the basis of period of delay rather than flat increase in the rate irrespective of the time period, it will ultimately increase the burden of interest on the assessee. It appears that this measure has been taken by the Government to speed up the receipts of service tax payments within due course of time. But if an analysis is made on impact of this change, then amount of Interest on delayed payment of interest that will be charged from the service tax defaulters will be much higher than that charged before. This will be clear from an illustration as given below:-
 
Assume a case where service tax amounting to Rs. 10, 00,000/- became due, say, on the 6th of July, 2012 and the assessee pays the dues on 6th of December, 2014. In such a case, the interest to be charged would be as below:

  1. 18% simple interest upto September, 30th, 2014.
  2. For the period from 1st October, 2014 to 6th December, 2014, the rate of interest will be 30% since the period of delay is beyond one year.

 

Period Delay Amended Interest Prior to Amendment
For period from 6.07.2012 to 30.09.2014 816 days 1000000*18%*816/365 =  402411/- 1000000*18%*883/365 = 435452/-
For period from 1.10.2014 to 06.12.2014 67 days 1000000*30%*67/365 =  55068/-
Total 457479/- 435452/-

 
Therefore, all we can say is that the service tax assessees should not think to delay the payment of service tax and beware because the extent of delay would determine their interest liability. However, it is appreciated that the proviso to section 75 granting three per cent concession on the applicable rate of interest will continue to be available to the small service providers. This fact is even clarified in the TRU letter issued by the government on 10.07.2014.
 
Before Parting:-
 
It is observed that the government is making every attempt to focus on its key source of revenue and making efforts to maximize the same. This is also reflected from the other amendments made in the Service Tax Laws wherein certain exemptions have been withdrawn and the scope of service tax has been expanded. Well, all that we can say to the Service Tax Assessees is BEWARE!!!
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com