2018 (1) TMI 1055 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Adjustment of remittance of wrong assessee code / registration number – denial on the ground that there is no provision for said adjustment under the Finance Act, 1994 – Held that: – The Board is issued a Circular dated 20.5.2003 wherein it is clarified that the assessee shall not be asked to pay service tax again if he has paid service tax under a wrong accounting code – reliance placed in the case of M/s. Sahara India TV Network Versus C.C.E. & S.T., Noida [2015 (10) TMI 2037 – CESTAT NEW DELHI], where Tribunal had set aside the demand as well as the penalties imposed directing the adjudicating authority to make necessary adjustment – impugned order cannot sustain – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – ST/41516/2016 – Final Order No.40138/2018 – Dated:- 18-1-2018 – Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member ( Judicial ) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member ( Technical ) Shri Raghavan Ramabhadran, Advocate for the Appellant Shri A. Cletus,
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ssionerate of Service Tax, Chennai instead of LTU, Chennai. In other words, they have paid service under registration No.xxxxx36 instead of No.xxxxx35. Though the appellant requested for adjustment of the payment made by them to the correct registration number, department declined the same. Show cause notice was issued alleging that the appellant has not discharged the service tax liability under registration No.xxxxx35, LTU, Chennai. The show cause notice was defended by the appellant stating that there was no short-payment of service tax and that the payment of service tax was made by them under a wrong assessee code and that the same has to be adjusted to the correct registration number. After adjudication, the Commissioner declined the request of the appellant and confirmed the demand of ₹ 4,92,55,858/- along with interest. No penalty was imposed. Aggrieved, the appellants are now before this Tribunal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Shri Raghavan Ramabhadran submi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
94. He drew support from the Board Circular No. 58/7/2003 dated 20.5.2003. That the circular clarified that the assessee shall not be asked to pay service tax again if he has paid service tax under a wrong accounting code and the matter should be sorted with the PAO. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sahara India TV Network Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2016 (41) STR 145 (Tri. Del.). 3. The ld. AR Shri A. Cletus reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that the provision of law does not allow such adjustment of remittance of wrong assessee code / registration number. He submitted that the appellant could have applied for refund and then pay the service tax along with interest. Since there is no provision under the law, for adjustment of such error, while remitting the service tax, the request of the appellant to make adjustment cannot be entertained. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Plastichemix Industries Vs.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
re – Regarding. There has been number of representations from registered service providers/receivers and Central excise assessees for rectification of mistakes occurred during remittances of service tax or Central excise duty against wrong accounting head and/or incorrect registration numbers. The Central Board of Excise & Customs vide S.T. Circular No.58/7/2003 (F.No.157/2/2003 Cx. A), dated 20-5-2003 has clarified that in such instances the matter should be sorted out with the P.A.O. and the assessee need not be asked to pay Service Tax again. The transfer entries has to be effected by the PAO, as per Pr. Chief Controller of Accounts, New Delhi s letter No. Coord/2(1)/76/e-PAO (Chennai)/13-14/159, dated 4-9-2013 and the Civil Accounts Manual of the PAO, read with letter Chord/2(8)/Cex/13-14/224, dated 1-5-2014, even for previous years. The instances, resulting in remittances against wrong Head of accounts/STC numbers/C. Ex. Registration number, are cited below : – 1. Service Tax
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ssee and the field formations. Case 1. The assessee should represent (Through Range and Division) to the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, describing the mistake occurred/reasons for such errors along with certified copies of the remittance challans, ST-3 Returns for the relevant period and any other document pertains to the issue to establish the genuine mistake and to ratify the error. Case 2. Same as above. Case 3. The assessee should obtain a no objection Certificate from the assessee or any other person against whose registration number to which the wrong remittances have been made by e-payment to transfer the amount from their registration number, certified by the concerned Range Officer of Central Excise/Service Tax that the said amount has not been utilized or paid by him and does not surface in his ledger (Books of accounts) and attach with the representation besides the documents enumerated against Case I above. The said issue was considered by the coordinate Be
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =