Balajee Machinery Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)
CESTAT Sets Aside Tax Demand Since It Was Based Only on Income Tax Portal Data; No Extended Limitation Where Demand Is Based on Income Tax Data: CESTAT
The appeal was filed by the assessee against an Order-in-Original dated 11.07.2019 by which the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Patna confirmed a Service Tax demand of ₹3,09,59,486 along with interest and penalties for the period 2012-13 to 2016-17.
The appellant, a proprietorship firm, was registered under the category of Clearing and Forwarding (C&F) Agent Services and had filed Service Tax returns up to the financial year 2014-15. The proceedings originated from information obtained from the Income Tax Department. The figures appearing in Form 26AS were compared with those disclosed in the appellant’s ST-3 returns and profit and loss account, leading to the issuance of a show cause notice on 19.04.2018.
During adjudication, the appellant submitted that its records had already been audited by the Service Tax Department up to FY 2013-14 without any dispute being raised. It also stated that it had earlier worked as a C&F Agent for Maihar Cements Ltd., but the agency had been discontinued, following which it surrendered its Service Tax registration. According to the appellant, the demand largely related to trading operations on which VAT had already been paid, and the necessary documents had been furnished before the adjudicating authority.
