SBI Card And Payment Service Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Chandigarh)
CESTAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal filed by SBI Card and Payment Services against the order dated 15.07.2014 confirming service tax demand of ₹2,39,26,095 for 2007-08 to 2011-12, with interest and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. The demand arose from alleged non-payment of service tax on unbilled revenue and differences between ST-3 and Income Tax Returns.
The appellant contended that the SCN dated 16.10.2012 was vague because it did not identify the taxable services, recipients or consideration, and that service tax could not be demanded merely from financial statements or return differences. It also disputed taxability of unbilled revenue, invoked limitation, and relied on CA certificates and journal entries. Revenue argued that the appellant’s registered service categories were known, the demand concerned short payment, and the extended limitation period was justified.
The Tribunal framed three issues concerning the vagueness of the SCN, taxability of unbilled revenue and invocation of the extended limitation period. It found that the SCN did not specify what services were rendered, to whom, or the consideration involved. The Tribunal rejected Revenue’s contention that the appellant’s registration under several service categories made separate identification unnecessary. It held that the Department was required to identify the services and recipients before determining tax liability.
