CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand against Umesh Tilak Yadhav on ground of Absence of Examination of Books of Accounts [Read Order]

The Mumbai bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the service tax demand against Umesh Tilak Yadhav on the grounds of the absence of examination of books of accounts. 

Umesh Tilak Yadav, the appellant assessee was a professional player of cricket and registered with Service Tax. On 26.06.2020, the assessee was issued with a show cause notice. It was stated in the said show cause notice that for the year 2014-15, there was a difference of Rs.1,97,71,881/- between the returns filed by the appellant as income shown in Income Tax Returns (ITR) and the value of service shown in Service Tax (ST) returns for the same period. 

The assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for confirming the service tax of Rs.24,43,804/- was demanded and proposals were made for imposing penalties under various sections. 

Mahesh Raichandani, the counsel for the assessee contended that there should have been an examination of the record and the nature of transactions and Revenue should have established that the said transactions were in respect of the provision of service and nowhere in the show cause notice, it was established that the difference was consideration received for providing any service. 

Badhe Piyush Barasu, the counsel for the department relied on the decisions made by the lower authorities and contended that the assessee was liable to pay the demand raised by the revenue: 

The Bench observed that based on the difference between the figures reposted in the ST return and the income tax return, it cannot be presumed that the difference was on account of the provision of service and only by calculating the service tax leviable on the said value without further examination of the activities of the appellant and examination of the transactions, service tax cannot be demanded. 

The two-member bench comprising Anil G Shakkarwar (Judicial) and Suvenda Kumar Pati (Technical) quashed the demand against the assessee. 

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates