News Update

French Parliament passes controversial anti-terror law empowering authorities to shut places of worship and restrict freedom of movementGST - CBEC clarifies on movement of goods within State and from one to another on approval basis + also notifies officers empowered to accept or reject application for GST PractitionerLinking Aadhaar with UAN - EPFO launches service for speedy servicesPM interacts with 380 Directors & Dy Secretaries in Central Govt; advises them to break silos with innovative waysCBEC notifies new Customs exchange ratesCBDT launches 'Online Chat' facility on official website to answer taxpayers' queriesJaipur & Srinagar rated best airports in world in 20 lakh to 50 lakh passenger category: AAI -Registration of Charitable bodies - CBDT seeks inputs to new provision in I-T ActST Not fn. 41/2012-ST - Renting of airport premises at departure module has a direct nexus with 'export sale' being made by duty free shops Refund correctly granted: CESTATIndia earns Rs 13800 Cr forex from tourismGST - Govt notifies list of supplies as deemed exports such as supplies to EoU, against EPCG and Advance Authorisation + notifies Forms for refund to exportersOver 100 preferential tax regimes dismantled across world: OECD (See 'TII Brief')Impact of Brexit - UK needs to keep close ties with EU for sustaining future living standards: OECD (See 'TII Brief')Delay in filing GSTR-3B - Interest waiver only for July month, not for AugustAhmedabad ITAT invites suggestions before goes paperless by Dec 15, 2017China proposes special treatment to SMEs in anti-dumping cases; WTO Members for solution within existing frameworkI-T- Department cannot tax capital gains tax in guise of lifting corporate veil, when there is mere transfer of shares of company and no stamp duty was paid towards plot of land: ITATST - Preparation of examination results on computers - as service is rendered 'in relation to' education, same is exempted by Notif. No. 14/2004-ST: CESTATCX - Element of excise duty on which CENVAT Credit was availed is not includible in AV of manufactured goods - duty demand, attributed to CVD which was not included in AV, is unsustainable: CESTATGovt allows Cipla to import morphine, codeine and baine for use in products to be exportedCBEC reassigns legacy cases pending with Commissioner(Appeals) to reduce litigationGovt to make revised quality standards for caustic soda mandatoryFDI SOP makes it clear no proposal to be sent to Department of Revenue & MEAMinister asks builders to improve living conditions of construction workersJoblessness marginally decreases in Q2 in OECD areasChandigarh Airport Customs seizes gold biscuits worth Rs 39 lakhApplications invited for post of Member at SAFEMA TribunalIndian billionaire Lakshmi Mittal contributes aid of USD 25 mn to Harvard Univ to enhance engagement with South Asian countriesPM urges corporate to use CSR funds to strengthen AyurvedaGST Council's decisions for small businessmen (See 'TOG Insight' in Tax on goods imported from abroad - explained furtherGST regime - continuation of area based incentiveST - Limitation prescribed u/s 11B of CEA, 1944 is not applicable to refund claim in respect of service tax paid under a mistake of law: HCI-T - Just because RBI treats 'provision for NPA' as losses/expenses, it will not override Income tax Act while deciding justification of such 'provision' u/s 36(1)(vii): HCCX - Promotional pack of Maggi Noodles supplied free of cost either by the appellant or by Tata Tea Ltd - Valuation u/s 4 of CEA, 1944 is proper: CESTATOver 69 lakh subscribers join Pension Yojana with contribution of Rs. 2690 CrAyurveda's market size to surpass USD 8 bn by 2022: MinisterIndian women scientists praised; Govt policy for all support: Minister
ST - Appellant in ST-3 declared the amount of PF and ESI on which no tax was shown to have been paid under the belief that reimbursement is not taxable - Demand time barred: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, OCT 11, 2017: THE appellants are engaged in providing manpower recruitment service and discharging the service tax.

It was observed that during the period 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 they had not paid the service tax on amount of provident fund and ESI of the amount collected from the service recipient.

SCN was issued and demand of differential service tax was confirmed.

In appeal before the CESTAT, the appellant submitted that as per the definition of manpower recruitment services, upto 15/06/2005, the supply of manpower was not covered under the definition, therefore, till this date no service tax demand is sustainable, consequently the demand on Provident Fund and ESI is also not payable. Reliance is placed on the Circular No. B1/6/2005-TRU dated 27/07/2005, Azur Cyber Pvt Ltd . - 2008-TIOL-2239-CESTAT-AHM, Seed Infotech Ltd . - 2014-TIOL-1690-CESTAT-MUM.

Moreover, as regards the amounts collected on account of provident fund and ESI since the same are reimbursement of actual amount which is deposited in the Provident Fund and ESI accounts, the same are excludible from the gross value of the service. In this regard, the appellant draws support from -

+ Circular No. 187/107/2010-CX.4 dated 17/09/2010

+ Bizsol India Services Pvt. Ltd. - 2013-TIOL-222-CESTAT-MUM

+ Shri Bhagvathy Traders - 2011-TIOL-478-CESTAT-BANG

+ Pharmalinks Agency (I) Pvt Ltd. - 2014-TIOL-1948-CESTAT-MUM

+ Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrafts Pvt. Ltd. - 2012-TIOL-966-HC-DEL-ST

+ Sercon India Pvt. Ltd. - 2013-TIOL-223-HC-DEL-ST

Furthermore, the demand is time barred as there is no suppression of facts; that the amounts of Provident Fund and ESIwere clearly declared in the ST-3 returns; that they were under bonafide belief that these amounts being a reimbursement is not taxable; that no penalty is imposable since there being no malafide .

The Bench observed -

"4. … We find that as per the fact, the case can be disposed of only on limitation. We find that the period of demand is 2005-2006 and 2006-2007, whereas the show-cause notice was issued on 21/10/2010. The appellant in their ST-3 return clearly declared the amount of provident fund and ESI on which no service tax was shown to have been paid under the belief that the reimbursement is not taxable. The department was not prevented from raising the issue that such amount is also liable to be taxed. However, no action was taken by the department on receipt of ST-3 return. As per the disclosure of the value towards provident fund and ESI in the ST-3 return, there is neither any suppression of fact nor any malafide intention on the part of the appellant. The appellants were otherwise discharging the service tax on the value other than the value representing the provident fund and ESI. As per this undisputed fact, in our considered view the demand is clearly time barred…."

In fine, the demand was set aside and the appeal was allowed only on limitation without going into the merits of the case.

(See 2017-TIOL-3680-CESTAT-MUM)