Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1265

Authorised Service Station & BAS service to Banks & Fin. Institutions – Dealer of Maruti cars – no service tax paid on free services provided to Maruti vehicle - Whether liability arise to pay interest on service tax and penalty when Service tax is paid p

Case: Commissioner of C. Ex., Mangalore V/s Abharan Motors Pvt. Ltd.
 
Citation: 2011 (23) S.T.R. 72 (Tri.-Bang.)
 
Issue:- Authorised Service Station & BAS service to Banks & Fin. Institutions – Dealer of Maruti cars – no service tax paid on free services provided to Maruti vehicle - Whether assessee liable to pay interest on service tax and liable to penalty when he paid Service tax prior to issue of SCN and when acting under Bona fide belief?
 
Brief Facts:- Respondent were dealer of Maruti vehicles and were an Authorized Service Station for Maruti vehicles. They were found to have rendered services classified under “Business Auxiliary Services” (BAS) and “Authorized Service Station” (ASS) during the period July 2001 to March 2006 without following statutory formalities including payment of Service tax due. M/s Maruti Udyog Ltd had a tie up with Non Banking Finance Companies and Insurance Companies for providing respectively loans and vehicle insurance to buyers of Maruti vehicles. They received commission for promoting Insurance Auxiliary Services (IAS) and Banking & Financial Services (BAF) rendered by the insurance companies and NBFCs respectively. The Respondents received a part of commission received by Maruti Udyog Ltd. for promoting insurance auxiliary services. Respondents did not pay service tax on ASS in respect of free services provided to Maruti vehicles as per MUL’s agreement with its customers.
 
The Original Authority confirmed the demand of service tax on commission received by the respondent during the material period under BAS and ASS. The extended period of Limitation was invoked. Interest was demanded and penalties imposed on respondent under different Sections of the Finance Act, 1994.
 
In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) found that larger period could not be validly invoked in the instance case. Department had made enquiries and ascertained the nature of transactions involved as early as in 2004. The records of the assessee were audited by the internal audit wing of the department in August 2005 and show cause notice was issued in June 2006. The Commissioner found that the department was aware of the transactions, the taxable value and tax involved and not paid by the assessee for the period from July 2001 to June 2004, in 2004. Yet the notice was issued only in 2006. The assessee had paid the Service tax found due from them prior to the issue of show cause notice. The Commissioner restricted the demand for one year period finding that no case of suppression of facts etc. was made out against the assessee to invoke larger period of limitation. Reliance was placed on the Apex Court’s Decision of M/s. Nizam Sugar Factory [2006 (197) E.L.T. 465(S.C.)]. The Commissioner (Appeals) also held that the assessee was not liable to pay interest on demand confirmed and was not liable to penalty as the assessee had discharged its tax liability prior to issue of show cause notice.
 
Against this order, Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal.
 
Appellant’s Contention:- Revenue contended that since the assessee had accepted its liability and paid the tax for the entire period, it was incorrect on the part of the Commissioner (Appeals) to have not imposed penalties under Section 76 and 78 of the Act. He had wrongly relied on the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Mass Marketing and Advertising Services-2006(3) S.T.R. 333 (Tri.-Bang.) and Final Order No. 1378/2006 dated 31.8.2006 in the case of M/s. Shakti Motors. It was further submitted that these authorities were passed relying on the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Machino Montell (I) Ltd.[2004(168) E.L.T. 466 (Tri.-LB)] and Karnataka High Court in the case of Shree Krishna Pipe Industries [2004(165) E.L.T. 508 (Kar.)] as also the Apex Court’s  judgment in the case of Rastriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. [2004(165) E.L.T. A53 (S.C.)].
 
It was submitted that these authorities were no longer good law in the wake of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Dharmendra Textiles Processors [2008 (231) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] and Rajasthan Spinning Mills [2009 (238) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)]. As per these judgments, an assessee who evaded excise duty by fraud, willful misstatement, suppression of facts etc. was liable to equal amount of penalty under Section 11C of the Central Excise Act. Payment of duty due prior to issue of show cause notice did not absolve the assessee from the penal liability u/s 11AC. The provisions of Section 78 were pari mateia to the provisions of Section 11AC of CEA, 1944. And the ratio of these judgments clearly applied to cases of evasion of service tax. It was settled that when Service tax was found due from a person for any past period, arrears could be recovered alongwith applicable interest. Provisions of Section 75 enabled recovery of interest in such cases.
 
Respondent’s Contention:- Respondent argued that in their case the Commissioner had not found that larger period of limitation could not be invoked. No suppression of facts could be alleged against the assessee. Despite obtaining all the relevant information as early as in October 2004, a show cause notice was issued only in June 2006. The Commissioner had rightly reduced the demand applicable to the longer period. In the circumstances, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee under Section 78 of the Act.
 
Respondent fairly conceded that they were liable to pay the interest for delay in payment of tax due.
 
Reasoning of Judgment:- The Tribunal held that there is no dispute that the assessee had rendered taxable services without following the relevant statutory formalities and had incurred liability for service tax under “Business Auxiliary Service” for the period from July 2003 to March 2006 and under “Authorized Service Station” for the period July 2001 to March 2006. The assessee paid the tax though under protest before issuance of show cause notice. Since the appellants had made a strong case on account of time bar.
 
The Tribunal further found that suppression of taxable value was noticed by Audit in October 2004. Correspondence between Range Superintendent and the appellants subsequent to audit did not result in issue of show cause notice. As regards interest liability, as rightly argued in the appeal, the Commissioner erred in waving the same under Section 75 of the Act. Only demands pertaining to period within one year of the date of issue of show cause notice remain sustainable. It was noted that there was confusion among trade for a long time regarding the liability to pay service tax on the mandatory services rendered by the assessee as a dealer and authorized service station of Maruti vehicles. The confusion was cleared in 2006 by Board circular no. 87/05/2006-ST dated 06.11.2006. Thus, it was held that respondent were under bona fide belief that service tax was not payable by them on the Authorised service station on the value of free services rendered to customers of Maruti vehicles for the reason that the said amounts had formed part of the value of the vehicle and suffeed excise duty.
 
With regard to BAS service, the Tribunal found that dispute is pending before various authorities. No case made out for imposition of penalty under Section 76 or 78 on the charge of evading payment of service tax.    
 
Decision:- Appeal partly allowed.

Comment:- When there is bonafide belief that the tax is not payable then penal provision cannot be imposed. The High Court has laid down the above principle in this decision and has rightly done so.

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