2011 (2) TMI 682

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....endran, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  The appellants, M/s. Lion Security Services were engaged in rendering 'Security Agency Services' during the period October 2003 to September 2005 and did not follow the statutory formalities as regards filing of ST-3 returns and payment of service tax. The assessee was registered with the department as a provider of security agency service. A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....original authority. In remand proceedings, vide Order-in-Original No. 71/2008 dated 18-7-2008, the original authority observed that the assessee had paid the service tax of Rs. 17,78,060/- and appropriated the same. He confirmed the demand of the said amount along with interest, imposed penalty of Rs. 3000/- under Section 77 of the Act, penalty equal to the service tax demanded under Section 78 an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....from the impugned order that the appellant has paid the service tax for the disputed period. In the instant case the only issue involved is with regard to imposition of penalty under Section 76, 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 for delayed payment of Service Tax, late filing of ST 3 returns. I find that the appellant has not complied with the order for pre-deposit of amount vide Stay Order No. 79/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gs. It was not explained as to how the appellant was liable for penalties. 3. The learned JDR submits that the appellant has not disputed the fact of non-payment of service tax. As the assessee was already registered with the department, the lower authorities were justified in imposing penalty for non-payment of service tax during the material period and not filing the ST-3 returns. As regards ....