75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

November 2012

2012 (27) STR 372 (Tri.-Ahmd) Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd. vs. CCE, Rajkot

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri, Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Adjustment of excess payment of service tax – in the absence of centralised registration – Held, it will be highly technical to deny the same.

Facts:
Appellant paid excess service tax in few months and then adjusted the same against the liability arising in the subsequent period. The said adjustment was made taking resort to Rule 6 (4A) of Service Tax Rules, 1994. However, during the extant period adjustment of excess service tax was done by the Appellant under an impression that he had applied for centralised registration, however, the department contended there was no application made for centralised registration. The Department did not permit such adjustment and demanded tax as shortfall along with interest and penalty.

Held:
Having not procured centralised registration is a technical issue. The fact remained that the Appellant paid service tax in excess and this fact is not disputed by the department. Relying interalia on the following judgments, the Tribunal set aside the demand raised:

Cases referred to

? Powercell Battery India Ltd. 19 STR 400 Nirma Architects & Valuers 1 STR 305
? Agrimas Chemicals Ltd. 10 STR 424
? Bharti Cellular Ltd. 1 STR 39
? Bayer Diagnostics India Ltd. 8 STR 367

Download PDF

You May Also Like

Indian growth rate — The new normal

2012 (27) STR 377 (Tri.-Del.) WLC College India Ltd vs. Comm. Of Service Tax, Delhi