SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

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
 
ST - Works Contract - No proof is forthcoming from records that earlier contract was cancelled and fresh contract signed on 06.06.2007 merely to avail benefit of composition scheme which came into effect on 01.06.2007: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, NOV 28, 2015: THIS is a Revenue appeal.

ASCN was issued to the respondent alleging that they had paid Service Tax under the Works Contract composition scheme from the month of June 2007 but had taken registration only on 29.06.2007. The SCN demanded service tax at the normal rate by disallowing the benefit of composition scheme.

The adjudicating authority while confirming the demand observed that the respondent cancelled the old contract and entered into a new contract to take benefit of composition scheme.

The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order passed by the adjudicating authority on two accounts. Firstly, he held that the Order-in-Original went beyond the grounds invoked in the show-cause notice. Secondly, he held that in terms of Rule 4 of STR, 1994, application for registration can be made within 30 days of commencement of business. And further, in terms of Rule 3 of Works Contract (Composition Scheme for Payment of Service Tax) Rules, 2007, the option to avail the scheme should be exercised prior to payment of Service Tax which was done in the present case. Furthermore, the earlier contract was cancelled as per agreement dated30.05.2007 and new agreement was signed on 06.06.2007 and which were indicative of two distinct contracts, the Commissioner(A) held.

As mentioned, CCE, Nasik is aggrieved with this order-in-appeal and is before the CESTAT.

The Bench, after considering the submissions observed -

++ There is no violation of the Works Contract (Composition Scheme for Payment of Service Tax) Rules, 2007. Rule 3 of the Rules requires that the option to pay tax under composition scheme should be exercised before payment of Service Tax. It is seen that the registration under Works Contract Service was taken on 29.06.2007 and the Service Tax was paid on 5th/6th July 2007. In view of this fact as well as the fact that under Rule 4 of Service Tax Rules the registration may be applied for within 30 days of commencement of business, the show-cause notice has no basis. The adjudicating authority proceeded to pass the Order on a completely fresh ground and therefore the order is liable to be set aside on this ground alone.

++ The Commissioner (A) recorded a clear finding that in the absence of any evidence to show that the new contract was merely an eyewash is not supported by any documentary evidence. No proof is forthcoming from the records that the earlier contract was cancelled and fresh contract signed on 06.06.2007 merely to avail the benefit of a composition scheme which came into effect on 01.06.2007. Revenue has not even cited the details of the old contract and the new contract and compared the two to come to the conclusion that they were same and the change of contract was not a bonafide act.

The Revenue appeal was dismissed.

(See 2015-TIOL-2531-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

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

TOP NEWS


AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



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

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST