2009 (5) TMI 239

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oy Kumari Chander, JCDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) (Oral)]. - In terms of the impugned order, the appellants are required to pre-deposit the following amounts: (a) Service Tax of Rs. 1,89,95,187/- and Education Cess of Rs. 3,79,904/; (b) Penalty of Rs. 200/- per day or 2% of the tax due, whichever is higher, under Section 76; (c) Penalty of Rs. 1000/- u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellants and also the receipts of money towards various services and came to the conclusion that the appellants should discharge Service tax liability under the category of CHA services. It is seen that this order has not been challenged by the Revenue at any higher forum. 4. The learned Advocate relied on the decision of this Bench in the case of Kinship Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Cochin - 20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the Assistant Commissioner, certain facts were not known to the department. Consequently, there was escapement of Service Tax. Therefore, he said there is enough justification for invocation of the longer period. He also stated that the decision in the Kinship Services case cited by the learned advocate can be distinguished. The facts are not identical. Further, the learned JCDR invited our atte....