2017 (5) TMI 1146 - AT - Service Tax

Appeal Dismissed: Upheld Penalties, Tax Demands

Shri P.R. Mehta Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -Vadodara-I

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the Order-in-Original confirming service tax demands and penalties. The appellant's challenges regarding short ... Demand of service tax - there is no evidence produced to controvert the facts on record - demand upheld. CENVAT credit - Benefit of N/N. 1/2006-St - demand on the ground that related documents (Invoices/Bills) have not been produced by the appellant - demand upheld. There is no scope to give any relief to the appellant even in case of penalties imposed u/s 76 of the FA, 1994 and Rule 15 (3) of CCR, 2004, when the appellant did not present any redeeming facts in their favor. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. Issues:1. Appeal against OIA confirming service tax demands and penalties.2. Short payment of service tax and wrongful availment of Cenvat Credit.3. Admissibility of benefit under Notification No. 1/2006-ST.4. Confirmation of penalties under Section 76 of Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 15 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.Analysis:Issue 1: Appeal against OIA confirming service tax demands and penaltiesThe appellant appealed against the Order-in-Original (OIA) confirming service tax demands and penalties. The demands included service tax short payment and disallowed Cenvat Credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demands and penalties, leading the appellant to approach the Tribunal.Issue 2: Short payment of service tax and wrongful availment of Cenvat CreditThe appellant was found to have short paid service tax for a specific period and availed Cenvat Credit without producing relevant invoices. The OIA confirmed the demand for short paid service tax and disallowed Cenvat Credit. The Tribunal noted the absence of evidence to challenge these findings, leading to the confirmation of these demands.Issue 3: Admissibility of benefit under Notification No. 1/2006-STThe appellant wrongly availed the benefit of Notification No. 1/2006-ST by paying service tax at a reduced rate after availing abatement, while also claiming Cenvat Credit on inputs. The Tribunal found that the conditions of the notification were not met, rendering the appellant ineligible for the benefits claimed.Issue 4: Confirmation of penalties under Section 76 of Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 15 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004Penalties under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, and Rule 15 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, were imposed on the appellant. The Tribunal upheld these penalties, noting the lack of mitigating circumstances presented by the appellant to warrant relief.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the impugned order due to the lack of merit in the appellant's arguments. The confirmation of service tax demands, disallowed Cenvat Credit, and penalties was maintained based on the facts and submissions presented during the proceedings.