TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (3) TMI 339
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....und on investigation that the appellants had not paid full amount of Service Tax on security charges collected by them and differential Service Tax was worked out to Rs. 3,52,67,513/-. The amount was demanded on the basis of figures in the Profit & Loss Account since the appellants have not any details. For the subsequent two years also, in spite of issue of repeated summons and letters to the appellants, they failed to submit the required data and details of actual amount of Service Tax collected, paid and payable. Therefore, in respect of subsequent two years, two more show-cause notices were issued on the basis of the amount shown as collected towards security service provided and Service Tax payable in respect of the subsequent periods ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In view of the above position, the appellants do not have any details, however, he submitted that whatever amount was received relating to the services rendered after 16-10-98, they have discharged the Service Tax liability. In this connection, he relied on the provisions of Finance Act, 1994, in support of his contention that services, rendered prior to 16-10-98 cannot be charged to Service Tax. Further, he also submitted that all the excess amounts shown in the Profit and Loss Account on which Service Tax has not been paid, relates to the services rendered prior to 16-10-98 and it is his submission that because of flood in 2005 and because of the method adopted, the appellants are not in a position to show any evidence that the amount co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... realization of dues and all of them are related to prior to 16-10-93, while it has been claimed that records relating to the period prior to July, 05 were not available because of flood. It is strange that, such differences can be dues of the period prior to 16-10-98 even after July, 05. The claim made by the appellants before us raises the following questions, for which we could not find any answer nor could the learned Advocate provide any answers - (a) When the appellants do not have the list of persons from whom the amount was dues, how much and what for, how the customers continued to pay the amounts to them? (b) If customers continued to pay, how come they could know if not indicated that the amount related to period prior to O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ffices at Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Chandigarh, Dehradun, Silvasa, Pune, Shimla, Delhi, Navi Mumbai etc. 7. In spite of the above, the Commissioner observed that the appellants submitted only a list of Debtors, which is also not complete. We are in agreement with the Commissioner's observation in para 4.4 where he has noted that "it is surprising to note that the Noticees have mentioned that still they had outstanding receipts to the tune of crores of rupees pertaining to the period 1982 to 1999. It is not known from where these financial figures are retrieved by them." While, on the one hand the appellants claimed that difference amount, on which they have not paid the Service Tax, relates to services rendered prior to 16-10-98, they have n....