TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 374
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e taxable services charged and collected by them and evading service tax considerably by not showing the actual amount of service provided. Hence, search proceedings were initiated against the appellant and during the course of investigation it was revealed that they are engaged in providing 'Pandal & Shamiyana Service' and 'Mandap Keeper Service'. Statements of the partner of the appellant were recorded and they admitted their tax evasion. On examination of the records of the appellant, it was noticed that during the period from April-2006 to December-2006, they have shown less amount in the front face of the invoices and at the reverse side of the invoices they showed actual amount which they collected from the customers and paid less amo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act. 2. Appeal filed against this order has been rejected and the issue is before me. The ld. Counsel on behalf of the appellant fairly agrees that the appellant had collected excess amount and had not paid service tax on the same. He submits that this was done because appellant was passing through a period of extreme financial difficulties and because of that the appellant was unable to pay service tax to the full extent. Further he submits that search operation was conducted on 14th February, 2007 and statement was recorded thereafter in the year 2007 itself. But show-cause notice was issued much later i.e. in 2009. He also submits that in view of the fact that no further investigat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vant. What is relevant is whether there was suppression of facts/misdeclaration with an intention to evade duty on the part of the appellant. Once suppression or misdeclaration has proved, the extended period becomes invokable and irrespective of the date of knowledge of the department, the relevant date would be 5 years as per statute. 4. I have considered the submissions of both sides and I find that in this case the very fact that amounts were collected by mentioning the same on the reverse side of the invoice and not paid service tax on the same clearly amounts to mis-declaration of value and suppression of facts on the part of the appellant. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Neminath Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4. The Tribunal has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Akash Fashion Prints Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2009 (239) E.L.T. 439 (Guj.) and in the case of Akash Fashion Prints Pvt. Ltd., the lower authorities had not extended the benefit of payment of reduced penalty in the event of payment of tax and interest within 30 days of the original order, which is not the situation in the present case. In the result, demand for service tax, interest and penalty as imposed on the appellant have to be upheld and appeal has to be rejected. However, I find that the lower authorities in this case have imposed penalty of 200% of the amount of service tax demanded on the appellant. According to the provisions of Section 78 of th....