News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
Service Tax is leviable on rendering of services - therefore, it is rate prevalent on date of rendering of service, which is relevant for levy of Service Tax - appeal allowed: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, AUG 27, 2013: A service tax demand of a princely sum of Rs.20,296/- was confirmed against the appellant on the "Commercial Training or Coaching" services rendered by them during the period July, 2004 to October, 2004. The appellant contested that for the period prior to 10.09.2004, the rate of Service Tax leviable was 8% and w.e.f 10.09.2004, the applicable rate was 10%. Therefore, for the services rendered prior to 10.09.2004, they are liable to pay Service Tax only @8% even though they raised bills after 10.09.2004. This contention of the appellant was rejected and the Service Tax demand was confirmed by the lower authorities.

Before the CESTAT, the appellant submitted -

(i) As per Board's Circular no. 62/11/2003-ST dated 21.08.2003 in para 3.2 thereof, it has been clarified as follows:-

3.2It is a basic principle that no tax can be charged except under authority of law. Thus, if the levy of service tax on a particular service comes into force on a given date, that service will not be taxable if rendered before that date. The levy of service tax on "Maintenance or repair service" has come into force on 1-7-2003. Accordingly any maintenance or repair service rendered prior to 1-7-2003 will not be taxable, irrespective of when the bills are raised or payment made. This will apply to other services as well which were rendered prior to the imposition of service tax on them.

(ii) Rule 6 of the STR, 1994 makes it clear that the receipt of payment for the services rendered is not relevant for determination of the tax and it is the date on which service has been rendered which is relevant and if during the period, the services were not taxable, the same cannot be taxed merely because the payment has been made afterwards. Reliance is placed on the decision in Ashok Kumar Jain, Prop. Vs. CCE, Indore - (2011-TIOL-2008-CESTAT-DEL).

The Bench observed -

"5.1 Service Tax is leviable on the rendering of services. Therefore, it is the rate prevalent on the date of rendering of the service, which is relevant for levy of Service Tax. The Board's instruction (supra) and also the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ashok Kumar Jain (supra) confirm this view. Recently, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ratan Singh Builders Pvt. Ltd. - (2013-TIOL-403-HC-DEL-ST) held that the rate that should be applied for levy of Service Tax is the rate prevalent on the date of rendering the services and not the rate applicable on the date of receipt of payment. Following these decisions, which apply to facts of the present case, we allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any, in accordance with law."

(See 2013-TIOL-1273-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.