Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Publish Date: 12 May, 2007
Print   |    |  Comment

PAYMENT OF SERVICE TAX BY MARCH 31: PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES

 

PAYMENT OF SERVICE TAX BY MARCH 31: PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES

 

The Central Board of Excise and Customs has issued Notification No. 01/2002-ST, dt.14.01.2005. It has amended the Rule 6 of Service Tax Rules, 1994. The Rule 6(1) after amendment reads as follows: -

 “(1) The service tax on the value of taxable service received during any calendar month shall be paid to the credit of the Central Government by the 25th of the month immediately following the calendar month :
Provided that where the assessee is an individual or proprietary concern or partnership firm, the service tax on the value of taxable service received during any quarter shall be paid to the credit of the Central Government by the 25th of the month immediately following the said quarter:
Provided further that the Service Tax on the value of taxable services received during the month of March or the quarter ending March, shall be paid to the credit of the Central Government by the 31st day of March of the calendar year.”
 
In this article, we are trying to analyze the practical difficulties arising out of implementation of this new amended Rule which are as follows: -
          1. Meaning of amendment : - As it is ample clear from the reading of new amended rule that the service tax for the month or quarter ending on March 31 has to be paid by March 31 itself. Earlier the assessee, other than individual, proprietary concern and partnership firms, were paying the service tax for a month by 25th of the following month. But they have to pay the tax for the month by March 31 themselves. For the rest of the months they will pay the tax as they were paying earlier. Similarly, the individual, proprietor and partnership firms who were paying tax for the quarter by 25th of the immediately following month, has to pay the tax for the month of March by March 31 itself.
          2. Objective of Amendment: - The Government has not declared the real objective behind the amendment. But it seems that the objective of Government is to collect the service tax for the financial year within the same financial year. It will enable the Government to show that they have achieved its targets. The Government will show its realization against the projected budget estimates. But it will create a lot of problems which are discussed in enumerated paras.
          3. Calculation of Tax: - The assessee has to calculate the complete amount received by him by March 31 on that day itself. He has to calculate the tax on the very same day. Thereafter, calculate the CENVAT credit and deduct the same from the tax amount. After this calculation, deposit the remaining amount of this day only. It will really be very cumbersome. The problem is aggravated by the large number of small assesses registered under the Service Tax. It is not expected from small photographers, dry cleaners, video-graphers etc. to calculate the amount and deposit the tax on the same day. If they fail to do so then they will face the harsh penal provisions of Rs. 100/- to Rs. 200/- per day under section 76 of the Act along with interest @13 % under section 75. This will invite to undue litigation.
          4. Estimated Tax amount: - The assessee who can not exactly calculate the tax amount will try to pay it on estimated basis. The shortfall in the tax amount will call for the interest and show cause notice for penal action. But the excess deposit of tax amount will lead to filling of refund application as there is no provision like maintenance of PLA register (as maintained by the Central Excise assessee) for the service tax assessee. Thus, they can not carry forward the excess amount. They have to pay the exact amount. There is also no provision for the adjustment also. The only provision of adjustment is available in Rule 6(3) which reads as follows: -
“Where an assessee has paid to the credit of Central Government service tax in respect of taxable service and the service tax in respect of taxable service, which is not so provided by him, either wholly or partially for any reason, the assessee may adjust the excess service tax so paid by him (calculate on pro rata basis) against the service tax liability for the subsequent period, if the assessee has refund the value of taxable service and the service tax thereon to the person from whom it was received.”
But the same situation is not available here and only solution is making an application for refund. The problem does not end here. If you are not able to estimate your tax liability exactly by due date then the department may ask for provisional assessment under Rule 6(4)of ibid. But it is very difficult procedure for small assessee of service tax. And too for the month of March only.
              5. Bank Holiday: - There is normally no transaction in the banks on year end. They are busy in closing their accounts. This will add fuel to fire. The assessee can deposit the tax on the next working day following the clause 6 of General Clause Act. But it will be against the basic objective of the Government to realize the amount in same financial year. The Board has to make extra arrangements for the same. They have to ask the bank to accept the Government dues on year end.
     Further, if the cheque is deposited on March 31 and realized later on then it will termed as payment of tax in time by virtue of Rule 6(2A) of aforesaid Rules. But when there is no transaction day in bank on march 31 then the cheque deposited on next working day will not be termed as payment by due date by the department. There is again scope for litigation.
6. Publicity: - This provision has changed the regular practice of paying tax by 25th of next month or quarter as the case may be. Seeing the large number of assessee registered with the department, this provision requires a very vide publicity. This can be done by newspaper, TV channels etc. But this will again incur a huge cost. The question again comes to mind that whether such a huge cost is feasible for just presentation of figures showing achievements of targets? The amount would have reached to the Exchequer on 25th of April. Should the hard earned money of the tax payers be wasted in this manner.
 
From foregoing, it is clear that the implementation of this provision will be very difficult. There is ample scope for litigation or refund claims, which will waste precious time and money of both department and assessee. Thus, this new provision of payment of tax by March 31 should be deleted from statue book.       
 
 
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