TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (7) TMI 236
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (i) Widening and Desilting of Mithi River from Mahim Causeway to Dharavi Bridge in BKC, and (ii) Vakola Nalla from Vakola Bridge to SCLR in BKC". In respect of the said work, the appellants were paid an amount of Rs.8,36,58,054/- for work (i) and Rs.2,41,61,270/- for work (ii) during the period 05.05.2006 to 31.7.2007. However, the appellant did not discharge any Service Tax liability on the said activity. Accordingly, a show-cause notice dated 06.09.2007 was issued demanding Service Tax on the activity undertaken by the appellant under the category of 'Dredging Service' as defined under Section 65(36)(a) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 65(145) for an amount of Rs.91,73,081/- along with interest thereon and also proposing to imp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no well-designed geometry of the channels as such. (b) Mithi River is not shown in several ward maps and at many places it is shown as Mithi Nala. In the report submitted to Maharashtra Pollution Control Board by Klean Environmental Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Mithi River has been described as being used as a open drain by the citizens, who discharge raw sewage, industrial waste and garbage into it. In his letter dated 19.11.2007 written by the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Maharashtra to the Hon'ble Prime Minister, it is stated that Mithi River is a storm water drain. (c) Some 43 storm water drains in Mumbai flow into Mithi River and biggest tributary is called as Vakola Nalla. A River is defined as natural flowing body ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in BKC, and (iii) Widening and Desilting of Mithi River from Mini Confluence to CST Bridge in BKC. Phase-II covers (i) Widening and deepening of Mithi River from Mahim Causeway to Dharavi Bridge and Vakola Nalla from Vakola Bridge to SCLR in BKC, (ii) Widening and deepening of Mithi River from Dharavi Bridge to Mini Confluence at Vakola Bridge in BKC, and (iii) Widening and deepening of Mithi River from Mini Confluence to CST Bridge in BKC. (b) From the tender Notice issued by MMRDA it is clear that the tender has been awarded for widening and deepening of Mithi River. In the contract awarded to the appellant, the name of the work is given as Widening and deepening of Mithi River from Mahim Causeway to Dharavi Bridge in BKC a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctions in the said petition. The Writ Petition was heard again on 3.12.2005 wherein an affidavit was filed on behalf of Maharashtra State Pollution Control Board, Mumbai and by the Under Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Maharashtra. As per the affidavit, the Government of Maharashtra has established a 'Mithi River Development and Protection Authority' pursuant to the Government Resolution dated 19 th August, 2005, mainly to channelize the Mithi river, remove and rehabilitate all activities adversely impacting the environmental conditions of Mithi river, beautify and redevelop suitable activities along the river. It is also stated in the said affidavit that the work of channelization by dredging is carried out by the MM....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is clear that the Government has established a "Mithi River Development and Protection Authority" with a view to channelize the river, remove and rehabilitate all activities adversely impacting the environmental conditions of Mithi river, beautify and redevelop suitable activities along the river etc. If Mithi River was not a river, there was no need to have undertaken all these activities by creating a special River Development and Protection authority. In the said affidavit, it Is further stated that the work to channelize the Mithi River by dredging is carried out by MMRDA o ensure proper channelisation of the river within the BKC. From these documentary evidences available on record, it is clear that the work has been undertaken in resp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity with an intent to evade payment of Service Tax. In the instant case, the demand has been raised within normal period of time. In this scenario, one has to consider whether the imposition of penalty of Rs. 1 crore is justified. Under Section 78, penalty is leviable equal to the Service Tax demand confirmed. In the instant case, Service Tax demand confirmed is Rs.91,23,081/- and penalty imposed is Rs. 1 crore; therefore, penalty imposed is in excess of the Service Tax demand and the same is not sustainable in law. 5.5 As regards the question whether penalty equal to Service Tax can be imposed, in our view suppression of facts or mis-statement with intent to evade Service Tax is not attracted in the facts of the case. The activities under....