Deepak Pandey Vs Commissioner of Service Tax Service Tax Division (Chhattisgarh High Court)
Chhattisgarh High Court held that denial of refund claim on the basis of limitation cannot be justified, since amount during investigation was paid under bona fide belief and particularly, when the Department itself acknowledged non-liability. Accordingly, appeal is allowed.
Facts- The appellant/assessee is duly registered with the Service Tax Department. The dispute in the present matter traces its origin to the issuance of a first summons dated 23.01.2016 u/s. 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 r.w.s. 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. Further, the Assistant Commissioner (Preventive) had sought a clarification from the Raipur Municipal Corporation vide letter dated 27.09.2015 regarding the purpose and usage of the Multi-Level Parking constructed by the appellant. The Commissioner, Raipur Municipal Corporation, subsequently issued a clarification on 22.10.2016 categorically stating that the Multi-Level Parking was meant for public welfare and was not intended for commercial, industrial or business use.
Upon scrutiny of the documents furnished by the appellant, the Department issued a letter dated 15.12.2016 recording closure of the investigation, stating that no discrepancy relating to service tax liability had been found. Before the investigation was formally closed, the appellant had deposited an amount of Rs. 14,89,086/- on 17.02.2016. Consequently, the appellant filed a refund application in Form-R on 09.02.2017 seeking refund of the said amount. The Adjudicating Authority passed Order-in-Original dated 09.05.2017 rejecting the refund claim. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Order-in-Original and dismissed the appeal.
