Department cannot adjust unconfirmed demand against refund payable to the Assessee
PrintListen to this Article
Department cannot adjust unconfirmed demand against refund payable to the Assessee
We are sharing with you an important judgement of the Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur [(2014) 51 taxmann.com 10 (New Delhi - CESTAT)] on following issue:
Issue:
Whether Department can adjust unconfirmed demand against refund payable to the Assessee?
Facts & Background:
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (“the Appellant”) filed refund claim of Rs. 11,79,720/- for the excess amount paid. The Appellant was issued a Show Cause Notice dated January 17, 2007 (“SCN”) to show cause as to why their refund claim of Rs. 11,79,720/- should not be rejected. The Appellant submitted their reply dated May 25, 2007 and was sanctioned entire refund claim by the Assistant Commissioner vide Order-in-Original No. 44/R/2007.
However, the Assistant Commissioner later issued a corrigendum dated July 17, 2007 to the SCN stating that as the Appellant had taken Cenvat credit to the tune of Rs. 11,18,182/- on the strength of the invoices for Capital goods issued by their Head Office, the same was not admissible as their Head Office was not registered as a registered dealer and therefore asking why their refund claim should not be rejected to the extent of Rs. 11,18,182/-.
Later, the Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld the adjustment of Rs. 11,18,182/- out of the total refund of Rs. 11,79,720/-and the Appellant was refunded only the net (remaining) amount of Rs. 61,538/- in form of Cenvat credit. Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi.
Held:
The Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi observed that there has been no Show Cause Notice given to the Appellant for showing cause as to why Cenvat credit amount of Rs.11,18,182/- (adjusted from the amount of refund sanctioned) was inadmissible to them and even if the corrigendum issued on July 17, 2007 is an attempt to be treated as a Show Cause Notice, the said corrigendum falls fatally short of the requirement of a notice under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994.
Accordingly, it was held by the Hon’ble Tribunal that while confirmed demand can be adjusted from the amount of refund, there is no provision to adjust unconfirmed demand from the amount of refund and in the instant case, Rs. 11,18,182/- cannot be held to be a confirmed demand.
Hence, the Department was directed to refund back Rs. 11,18,182/- to the Appellant along with applicable interest.
Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavors. In case of any query/ information, please do not hesitate to write back to us.
Thanks & Best Regards.
Bimal Jain
FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons)
Flat No. 34B, Ground Floor, Pocket - 1,
Mayur Vihar, Phase - I,
Delhi – 110091, India
Desktel: +91-11-22757595/ 42427056
Mobile: +91 9810604563
Email: bimaljain@hotmail.com
Category : Service Tax | Comments : 0 | Hits : 344
CENVAT CREDIT ON SET TOP BOX INTRODUCTION Service providers have at least a Telephone in their office. They are paying service tax on the telephone charges. The service tax on telephone charges becomes a part of the cost for the service provider. When he collects service tax from the customer it becomes tax on tax which increases the actual rate of tax payment. This phenomenon of tax on tax is called the cascading effect. The government does not want this to happen. The...
NO KRISHI KALYAN CESS ON DEBTORS AS ON 13th MAY’ 2016 (PART -2) Read more at: http://www.casansaar.com/article-submit.htmlThe enabling provisions for KRISHI KALYAN CESS (KKC) are contained in Chapter – VI of Finance Act’ 2016. As per the provisions, KKC shall be applicable at 0.5% on all taxable services and the proceeds of KKC would be exclusively used for financing initiatives relating to improvement of agriculture and welfare of farmers. The Cess will come into force with ...
As you are aware that the Finance Act, 2016 has increased the service tax rate to include a new cess, namely Krishi Kalyan Cess, which is applicable w.e.f. 01/06/2016. The effective rate of service tax for all new services provided after 01/06/2016 shall be as below: Service Tax ...
CENVAT CREDIT AVAILABLE VS CENVAT CREDIT TAKEN ALARMING AMENDMENT IN RULE 6(3) OF CENVAT CREDIT RULES (a) A manufacturer who manufactures two classes of goods namely:- Non exempted goods removed Exempted goods removed Or (b) a provider of output service who provides two classes of services, namely:- Non Exempted Services Exempted Services Shall follow any one of the following options applicable to him namely:- (i) pay an amount equal to 6% ...
Date : 19.03.2016 M/s. ABC LLP ( Service Provider ) M/s. XYZ Limited ( Service Recipient ) Ref: Service Tax on Works Contract and RCM Opinion Before giving opinion on the issues it will be useful to refer the questions related with this transaction. Assume ABC is LLP and XYZ Ltd is Body Corporate. ABC LLP is a sub contractor of XYZ Limited. XYZ Ltd sub contracted Works Contract work as well as Labor work also some time. Both partie...
Comments