Service tax demand based solely on discrepancies between sales records and Form 26AS is invalid; Form 26AS (derived from IT law) cannot be the sole basis. Independent proof of taxable service is required. { Aneri Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (2025) 30 Centax 266 (CESTAT‑Ahmedabad)}
Facts:
- The Department issued a service tax demand against Aneri Construction Pvt. Ltd.
- The basis for the demand was the difference between the income shown in the company’s records and the figures reflected in Form 26AS (a tax credit statement under Income Tax law).
- No independent evidence of taxable services rendered was brought on record by the Department.
Issue:
Whether a demand of service tax can be sustained solely on the basis of Form 26AS without any corroborative evidence of taxable service actually rendered.
Held:
- The CESTAT (Ahmedabad) held that Form 26AS, being a document generated under Income Tax law, cannot be the sole basis for raising a service tax demand.
- There must be independent proof that the assessee actually rendered taxable services.
- In absence of such proof, the demand is unsustainable.
