Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
(Central Board of Excise & Customs)
New Delhi, the 20th September 2010
Circular No. 130/12/2010 – ST
To
The Chief Commissioners of Central Excise and Service Tax (ALL),
The Director General of Service Tax
The Director General of Audit
The Director General of Central Excise Intelligence,
The Commissioners of Service Tax (ALL)
Madam/Sir,
Subject: Powers of adjudication of Central Excise Officers in Service Tax cases
– instructions – regarding
Attention is invited to Board’s Circular No. 80/1/2005 – ST dated 10.05.2005 and
No. 97/8/2007 dated 23.08.2007 (para12.2) which specifies uniform monetary
limits for adjudication of cases under section 73 and section 83 A of the
Finance Act, 1994. At present adjudication powers in Service Tax cases have been
delegated upto the level of Assistant Commissioners and Superintendents were not
vested with any authority to adjudicate cases. The Board has decided to confer
the power of adjudication on Superintendents for cases involving service tax
upto Rs. 1 lakh in a show cause notice, except in respect of issues relating to
taxability of services, valuation of services and cases involving extended
period. Accordingly the monetary limits for adjudication of cases has been
revised vide Notification
No. 48/2010 – Service Tax dated 8th September 2010.
- The revised monetary limits are as follows:
Table I
| Sr. No. |
Central Excise Officer |
Amount of service tax or CENVAT credit specified in a
notice for the purpose of adjudication under Section 83A |
| (1) |
(2) |
(3) |
| (1) |
Superintendent of Central Excise |
Not exceeding Rs. one lakh (excluding the cases relating to taxability of
services or valuation of services and cases involving extended period of
limitation.) |
| (2) |
Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy
Commissioner of Central Excise |
Not exceeding Rs. five lakhs (except cases where Superintendents are empowered
to adjudicate.) |
| (3) |
Joint Commissioner of Central Excise |
Above Rs. five lakhs but not exceeding Rs. fifty lakhs |
| (4) |
Additional Commissioner of Central Excise
|
Above Rs. twenty lakhs but not exceeding Rs. fifty lakhs |
| (5) |
Commissioner of Central Excise |
Without limit. |
The revised monetary limits for the purpose of adjudication under section 73 are
as specified as below,-
Table – II
| Sr. No. |
Central Excise Officer |
Amount of Service Tax or CENVAT credit specified in a notice for the
purpose of adjudication. |
| (1) |
(2) |
(3) |
| (1) |
Superintendent of Central Excise |
Not exceeding Rs. one lakh (excluding the cases relating to taxability of
services or valuation of services and cases involving extended period of
limitation.) |
| (2) |
Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of
Central Excise |
Not exceeding Rs. five lakhs (except cases where Superintendents are empowered
to adjudicate.) |
| (3) |
Joint Commissioner of Central Excise |
Above Rs. five lakhs but not exceeding Rs. fifty lakhs |
| (4) |
Additional Commissioner of Central Excise |
Above Rs. twenty lakhs but not exceeding Rs. fifty lakhs |
| (5) |
Commissioner of Central Excise |
Without limit. |
- In respect of the above powers of adjudication conferred on the
Superintendents, it is clarified as under,-
- The Superintendents would be competent to decide cases that involve Service
Tax and / or CENVAT credit upto Rs. one lakh in individual show cause notices.
- They would not be competent to decide cases that involve taxability of
services, valuation of services, eligibility of exemption and cases involving
suppression of facts, fraud, collusion, willful mis-statement etc.
- They would be competent to decide cases involving wrong availment of
CENVAT credit upto a monetary limit of Rs. one lakh.
- The jurisdictional Commissioners of Central Excise may redistribute the
pending cases in the Commissionerate based on above factors. It is further
clarified that notwithstanding this revision, in all cases, where the personal
hearing has already been completed, orders will be passed by the officer before
whom the hearing has been held. Such orders should normally be issued within a
month of the date of completion of the personal hearing.
- It may also be noted that the age-wise pendency of cases as shown in the
Monthly Technical Report should be reported based on the date of issuance of
show cause notice and not on the basis of transfer of cases to the new
Adjudicating Authority. The jurisdictional Commissioners should ensure that the
work of re-allocation of the pending cases, issuance of corrigendum to the Show
Cause Notices, transfer of relevant files and records etc, should be completed
in a time-bound manner at the most within a month. A compliance report in this
regard should be sent to the Chief Commissioner by the Commissioner, who in
turn, should submit the details to the DGST by 30th September 2010. DGST will
consolidate and submit a report to the Board by 15.10.2010 to the effect that
all the work regarding re-allocation of cases has been completed.
- The contents of this circular may be suitably brought to the notice of the
field formations and the Trade.
- Hindi version will follow.
(Himanshu Gupta)
Commissioner (Service Tax)
CBEC, New Delhi
F. No. 137/68/2010 – CX. 4