https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777640 CESTAT affirmed the adjudicating order and dismissed the appeal. The tribunal held the ex parte hearing was justified as the appellant failed to avail offered opportunities. Demand of service tax for 2013-14 and later periods, interest under Section 75, penalty under Section 78 and late fees under Section 70 read with Rule 7C were upheld after finding that the appellant collected but did not remit tax, misclaimed an exemption on a post-cutoff contract, and filed nil or no ST-3 returns, indicating willful suppression; amounts reimbursed by contractors were noted but did not absolve liability. en-us Tue, 02 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 08:19:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777640 CESTAT affirmed the adjudicating order and dismissed the appeal. The tribunal held the ex parte hearing was justified as the appellant failed to avail offered opportunities. Demand of service tax for 2013-14 and later periods, interest under Section 75, penalty under Section 78 and late fees under Section 70 read with Rule 7C were upheld after finding that the appellant collected but did not remit tax, misclaimed an exemption on a post-cutoff contract, and filed nil or no ST-3 returns, indicating willful suppression; amounts reimbursed by contractors were noted but did not absolve liability. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 02 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777640