2011 (4) TMI 1178

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by the Appellant. So they conducted some investigations including a search at the premises of the Appellant. Based on evidences gathered an SCN was issued to the Appellant which was adjudicated vide order dated 06-03-07. The operative part of the order is reproduced below:-   1. I confirm the demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs.13,23,058.34 and Education Cess of Rs.13,386.06, total amounting to Rs.13,36,444/- for the period from 1.4.2001 to 31.12.2005 sub section (2) of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 by invoking extended period of limitation.   2. I confirm the recovery of interest under Section 75 of the Act for the confirmed demand of Rs.13,36,444/-.   3. Under Section 76 of the Act, I impose penalty equal ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted 18-09-2007. The operative part of the order is re-produced below:-   The appellant have submitted certificates dated 18.6.2007 and 3.7.2007 issued by Rampaul & Associates, Chartered Accountants, # 189 Sector 40-A, Chandigarh who have certified that an amount of Rs.6,63,048/- as detailed above has been deposited as service tax by M/s Arpit Advertising Chandigarh and by others on behalf of M/s Arpit Advertising Chandigarh and that the information has been compiled from the books and records as produced before them and found to be correct.   In the light of the above certificates issued by the Chartered Accountant I accept that the appellant have already discharged their service tax liability of Rs.6,63,048/- and the demand....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....upon the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant without verifying the facts. This certificate (enclosed as Annexure A ) is ab-initio void as the figures in column 3 which relates to outstanding amount pending recovery due to legal cases pending in the Courts is the gross amount inclusive of Service Tax and no Commission which actually comes to Rs.1,07,406/-. Whereas, the fact is that Chartered Accountant while calculating the net taxable amounts has wrongly subtracted Rs.7,17,157.80 (instead of Commission of Rs.1,07,406/-). This has resulted in misleading the department by distortion of the figures. Commissioner (Appeals) has been misled while adjudging the case:   (ii) Commissioner (Appeals) has committed an error of judgme....