GTA Service - Refund of ST deposited by Service Recipient in Transporter's name

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1328

Case: COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., ALLAHABAD versus AZAM RUBBER PRODUCTS LTD

Citation: 2011 (23) S.T.R. 263 (Tri. - Del.)

Issue:- GTA – Service recipient deposited ST in the name of transporter. Later on deposited in own name – refund of ST earlier deposited twice– whether permissible?

Brief Facts:- Respondents are engaged in the manufacture of footwear falling under Sub-Heading No. 640110 of Central Excise Tariff. They availed services of Goods Transport Agencies for transportation of inputs and final products. Since they fall under Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, the liability to pay service tax in respect of Goods Transport Agency shifted on them as they were recipient of the service and they were registered under Service Tax.

Respondent received services from M/s. Okay Transport Corporation. They deposited the Service tax amounting to Rs. 1,14,091/- on taxable service received from the transporter vide TR-6 No. 1 dated 28-3-2007 at the main branch of State Bank of India, Gorakhpur. However, they mentioned the name of M/s. Okay Transport Corporation in the name of TR-6 challan instead of mentioning their own name.

Once the Respondent came to know about the mistake of not showing the name correctly, they remitted the same amount i.e. Rs. 1,32,985/- again vide TR-6 challan dated 15-5-2007 in main Branh, Gorakhapur wherein they mentioned their own name and registration number. Since Service tax was paid twice for the same service, they filed refund application claiming refund of Rs. 1, 14,091/- paid by them against TR-6 challan dated 28-3-2007. They also submitted a disclaimer certificate from M/s. Okay Transport Corporation to the effect that they have no objection in refunding the said amount to the respondent.

A show cause noticed dated 17-4-08 was issued for rejecting the claim on the ground that the TR-6 challan dated 28-3-2007 was showing the name and address of M/s. Okay Transport Corporation Ltd.

The Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claim vide order dated 17-4-08 on the ground that the TR-6 challan bear in the name of M/s. Okay Transport Corporation and the service tax registration number indicated on the TR-6 challan as AAAFV 8284 DST 001 belonged to Veebros Freight Carriers, Kanpur.

In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed refund claim by holding that both amounts have been paid by the same party viz. the Respondent against the same service on account of mistake and the Respondent is eligible for the refund.

Aggrieved by order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Department filed appeal before the Tribunal on the ground that refund can be granted only to M/s. Okay Transport Corporation who made the actual payment as per TR-6 challan and not to the Respondent.

Reasoning of Judgment:- The Tribunal held that Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 is made applicable for the purpose of claiming refund under service tax also. Under this Section, it is not necessary that the person paying the tax has to make the claim for refund. Any person is authorised to claim the refund, if the applicant is able to furnish documents to establish that the amount of duty in relation to which such refund is claimed was collected from or paid by him and such incidence of duty has not been passed on by him to any other person. In this case the duty incidence has in fact has been paid by the Respondent only. They have also produced a disclaimer certificate from M/s. Okay Transport Corporation, Kanpur. The other objection is that the service tax code indicated is not that of M/s. Okay Transport Corporation but that of M/s. Veebros Freight Carriers. This does not alter the situation because the duty has been paid by the Respondent. No merit in appeal.

Decision:- Appeal rejected. Cross Objection disposed of.

Comment: - The service tax deposited twice has to be refunded whether it is deposited in own name or in the name of other person. Furthermore, Section 11B allows refund can be claimed by any person.

Comments

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1328

Post a Comment

Query