AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The instant appeal has been filed by East Central Railways, Hajipur, against the Order-in-Original dated 03.01.2020 passed by the Pr. Commissioner, CGST & CX, Patna, whereby demand of service tax of Rs.612.38 crores approx. has been confirmed along with interest and penalty.
The facts of the case in brief are that the proceedings have been initiated against the appellant on the ground that service tax collected by them have not been deposited with the Government Treasury as is required under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. The learned Commissioner in the impugned order has observed that though the appellant has submitted that the amount has been deposited through book adjustment but the actual payment has not been established.
After hearing both the sides through video conferencing and on perusal of the documents placed before us, we find that the Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, vide letter no. 2017/AC-II/1/21 dated 16.11.2020 has confirmed the deposit of the service tax. It has been initer-alia stated that
"....The amount of service tax collected by Railways was being credited to Civil Head of Account, Major Head - 0044 Service Tax every month through monthly Account Current sent to CGA, Ministry of Finance as per existant guidelines from the Ministry of Finance. The details of Service Tax booked under Major Head 0044 by Ministry of Railways during the financial year 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are as under ..."
In view of the above, we find that service tax stands deposited with the Government Treasury through account adjustment, instead of payment by challans, as per the guidelines issued by the Finance Ministry, and hence, this is not the case of non-payment of service tax.The said view has consistently been taken by the Tribunal in the following cases:
· Post Master vs. CCE, Jodhpur (Final Order no. 50372/2020 dated 27.01.2020 in Service Tax Appeal no. 50530 of 2019 passed by CESTAT, Delhi)
· Sr. Post Master vs. CCE Jaipur (Final Order no. 51022 / 2018 dated 01.03.2018 in Service Tax Appeal no. 55665/2014 passed by CESTAT, Delhi)
· Supdt of Post Office vs. CCE, Guwahati 2017 (4) GSTL 83 (Tri-Kol)
In view of the above, the impugned order cannot be sustained and hence, set aside.
We are also of the view that there is a need for examination of quantification of tax amount involved during the period in dispute so as to ensure whether the same corresponds to the amount deposited by way of book adjustment for which the matter is remanded back for limited purpose. In the said remand proceedings, the authorities shall verify with regard to the quantification and supporting documents. Needless to mention, the adjudicating authority shall afford reasonable opportunity of personal hearing observing the principles of natural justice. The appellant shall co-operate with the authorities and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments to avoid further delay in completion of remand proceedings.
The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand to the learned Adjudicating Authority.
(Operative part of the order was pronounced in the open Court.)