2012 (12) TMI 34

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s directed against the order in original No. 03/VDR-II/S.T./Offence/2006 dated 25.8.2006. 2. Brief facts that arise for consideration are that appellant herein was engaged in the job work for generation and supply of electricity and steam to M/s. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Limited (IPCL for short), during the period from 16.6.2005 to 06.11.2005. Lower authorities are of the view that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., 1994. 3. Appellants are in appeal only against the imposition of penalty under Section 76 and 77. 4. It is the submission of the learned authorised representative of the appellant that the appellant had right from the beginning held a view that the services rendered by them are not taxable and that on the customer's insistence they raised the invoices and agreed to discharge the service ta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ervice tax liability and the consequences arising thereof, if they do not discharge the service tax liability. Having raised the invoices indicating the service tax liability, the appellant was very much ware of service tax liability and hence should have discharged the service tax liability and should have filed the returns as indicated in the statute. Having not done so, they are liable to penal....