2018 (8) TMI 812 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI – Business Auxiliary Service – it was alleged that they have not reflected the correct value of the service in their ST-3 returns filed by them during the financial year 2009-10 to 2013-14 – Held that:- The dispute in the present appeal relates to the verification of the facts as to whether the commission which has accrued in one particular month was actually received by the assessee in a subsequent month/year/period. It might be that the payment which has been received by the appellant in one particular period was on account of the services belonging to the previous financial year. In such a scenario, the appellant’s stand has to be verified correctly from their books of account and should be matc
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
gent of M/s Siyaram Silk Mills Limited. The appellant was registered with the Service Tax Department and was discharging its duty liability, accordingly. 4. Based upon the comparison of the value of the services as reflected in their Balance Sheet and Form 26 AS, it was alleged that they have not reflected the correct value of the service in their ST-3 returns filed by them during the financial year 2009-10 to 2013-14. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated against them by way of a Show Cause Notice, raising demand of duty to the tune of ₹ 4,22,756/-. The said Show Cause Notice culminated into an order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the demand along with interest and imposition of penalty of identical amount under Sectio
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
government document, indicates the total amount paid/credited in the name of the appellant as well as Income Tax deducted at source against the said payment in their respective columns. As such he observed that there is no doubt that the amount shown in form 26 AS must have been received by the appellant. 7. While I agree with the above observations made by Commissioner (Appeals) but the dispute in the present appeal relates to the verification of the facts as to whether the commission which has accrued in one particular month was actually received by the assessee in a subsequent month/year/period. It might be that the payment which has been received by the appellant in one particular period was on account of the services belonging to the p
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =