Order Date – 25 January 2024

Parties: Principal Commissioner CGST & Central Excise, Mumbai East Vs M/s. SBI Life Insurance Company Ltd.

Facts –

• The Respondent. M/s. SBI Life Insurance Company Ltd., is engaged in providing different type of insurance services, apart from providing services like renting of immoveable  property etc.
• Duty demand along with interest and penalties under Section 73, 75, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 made on the basis of differential figures available in Service Tax-3 Returns and Income Tax Returns for the period between October 2013 and March 2014 against the respondent were set aside.
• Being aggrieved the Department filed the appeal.

Issue –

• Whether the Learned Commissioner has considered relevant documents before passing of his order?

Order –

• The Tribunal observed that  apart from examining the certificate issued by Chartered Accountant, Learned Commissioner had also examined other relevant documents from the case records and observed glaring discrepancies ranging from taking of figures of Income Tax Return of the preceding year 2012-13 and comparing the same with Service Tax-3 Return of the subsequent year 2013-14 and making demand on the basis of Service Tax-3 returns of six months while taking figures of Income Tax Return for the entire Financial Year.
• Interestingly enough, he has categorically pointed out, which is also noted in the Review order of the Committee of the Chief Commissioner’s, that three different percentage of Service Taxes ranging from 1.545% and 3.09% to 12.36% were leviable against the services rendered by the Respondent for different insurance categories but Show-cause notice contains a calculations of demand on the basis of its calculations @12.36%.
• Hence, in view of irregularity in the Show cause and the non-sustainability of demand purely on the basis of difference between ST-3 return and Income Tax returns of any other period, without any further examination to establish that the difference is on account of consideration received towards discharge of services, the appeal is dismissed.