Late filing of exp 4 return-remedies
This query is : Resolved
10 July 2013
Qst. According to Notification 42/2012 dated 29.06.2012 service tax is exempted on Service provided by a commission agent outside India and engaged under a contract or agreement or any other document by the exporter in India, to act on behalf of the exporter, to cause sale of goods exported by him subject to conditions.
We fulfill all condition except late filing the EXP 4 return.
Actual due date for the period Apr'12 to Sept'12 is 15.10.2012 but we filed it on 27.02.2013.
Now department issue show cause notice and demanding service tax.
What are the remedies available to this matter??
Please reply as it urgent.
We fulfill all condition except late filing the EXP 4 return.
Actual due date for the period Apr'12 to Sept'12 is 15.10.2012 but we filed it on 27.02.2013.
Now department issue show cause notice and demanding service tax.
What are the remedies available to this matter??
Please reply as it urgent.
10 July 2013
Due date for April- June 2012 was 25/11/2012 and for July-Sept 2012 was 30/04/2013.
And just because you did not filed ur return (As u said) department cannot ask u to pay service tax, but will demand late fling fees.
And just because you did not filed ur return (As u said) department cannot ask u to pay service tax, but will demand late fling fees.
11 July 2013
Pradeep Nainawati.
This is not ST-3 return. It is EXP 4 return as per Notification 42/2012
This is not ST-3 return. It is EXP 4 return as per Notification 42/2012
14 July 2013
one of the condition to avail exemption is that return should be filed within 15 days. But non compliance of such procedural lapse cannot be a ground to disallow the substantial benefits given under law.
Kindly refer case law of Um Cables Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others [2013-TIOL-386-HC-MUM-CX]
In this case the High Court of Mumbai held that rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules,2002 cannot be rejected on grounds of non submission of original and duplicate ARE-1 forms, which is only a procedural requirement under notification issued under Rule 18 thereof.
On the basis of above judgement you can argue with officers.
Kindly refer case law of Um Cables Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others [2013-TIOL-386-HC-MUM-CX]
In this case the High Court of Mumbai held that rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules,2002 cannot be rejected on grounds of non submission of original and duplicate ARE-1 forms, which is only a procedural requirement under notification issued under Rule 18 thereof.
On the basis of above judgement you can argue with officers.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Tax Audit Applicability – Newly Formed Partnership Firm with Profit Below 6%/8%
- Unregistered suppliers utility
- TDS CREDIT MISMATCHING
- Buy back of shares u/s69
- Difference between Date of Payment and Date of Deduction?
- EXPORT COMMERCIAL INVOICE HSN CODE
- URGENT-Eligible leaves being shown as 24 days for 3 years Articleship instead of 156 days in 108
- ITR 4 and Bank transactions
- GST Rate for Catering Services
- RCM @ 5% on Hamali charges, Transport Charges, Unloading charges we take ITC or not
- CALCULATION OF DEFFERED TAX - OP BL IS DTL & CURRET IT DTA
- LLP audit under companies act
- Experienced CA recommendation from Kolkata for FNO return filing
- Interest Reporting in Form 168
- Sales of goods of amount Rs77 lakhs to a party
- Tax Demand of ₹4,650 for AY 2026-27
- Concept of Vendor and customner reconciliation
- Mistake in e-invoice identified after 24 hours
- EXPORT PAYMENT
- NRI ITR2 account in 2025-26.
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals
CAclubindia
