Smera Ratings & Research Ltd., Acuite Ratings & Research Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai East
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 683 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 29-1-2019
APPEAL Nos. ST\/88297, 88306\/2018 – A\/85230-85231\/2019
Service Tax
Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial)
\nShri Nilesh Jhaveri, C.A., for appellant
\nShri S.B. Mane, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for respondent
\nORDER
\nThese two appeals are filed against order-in-appeal No. MUM-DGPM-WRU\/APP-96-97\/2017-18 dated 12.4.2018 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & CGST (Appeals), Mumbai East.
\n2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in providing credit rating services to M\/s. National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. (NSICL) against an agreement dated 20.9.2011. Alleging that the appellant had incorrectly adjusted the service tax liability of Rs. 6,98,597\/- in contravention of Rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 against the service tax liability<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n provisions of service to few clients and while paying the total amount, reduced the value of such scored out amount as reflected in the invoice. In support, he has placed invoice No.0127\/2013-14 dated 11.3.2014. It is his contention that being a Government undertaking, NSICL separately does not issue any direction to submit revised invoices. Even though they have issued credit notes against invoice No.0127\/2013- 14 dated 11.3.2014 reducing the value by Rs. 1,29,000\/-, however, corresponding certificate was not issued by NSICL. He submitted that the credit note and invoices and the agreements could not be placed before the authorities below so as to allow them the benefit under Rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. He submits that they are in possession of all evidences including corresponding ledger account and in the event necessity arises, they can produce a Chartered Accountant's certificate in support of their claim that the invoice value had been reduced while making the payme<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n e, the service tax excess paid whether admissible to be adjusted against their future liability in accordance with Rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The contention of the learned C.A. is that the relevant agreement, corresponding credit notes and the ledger account could not be placed before the adjudicating authority resulting into confirmation of the demands. I find merit in the contention of the learned C.A. for the appellant on going through the relevant credit note No.007\/2014-15 dated 23.9.2014, invoice No.009\/2013-14 dated 29.3.2014 and the agreements between the appellant the service recipient. To provide an opportunity to the appellant, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority so as to enable them to place all the relevant documents in support of their claim that excess service tax was paid by them during the relevant period and the adjustment was admissible to them since not against written off bad debts. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Smera Ratings & Research Ltd., Acuite Ratings & Research Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai EastService Tax2019 (2) TMI 683 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMICESTAT MUMBAI – ATDated:- 29-1-2019APPEAL Nos. ST\/88297, 88306\/2018 – A\/85230-85231\/2019Service TaxDr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) Shri Nilesh Jhaveri, C.A., for appellant Shri S.B. Mane, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for respondent ORDER These … Continue reading “Smera Ratings & Research Ltd., Acuite Ratings & Research Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai East”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16728","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16728","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=16728"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16728\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16728"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16728"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16728"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n7. Appeals are allowed by way of remand to the adj<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n