TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (6) TMI 491
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the assessee as per table-1); Rs.82,38,023/- (as set out in Table-2); and Rs.1,99,407/- (as set out in Table-3) ought to be treated as the gross value received for taxable services performed, under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 (the Act) read with Notification No. 1/2006-ST dated 1.3.2006 as amended by Notification No. 38/2007-ST dated 23.8.2007. The authority also confirmed the service tax demand of Rs.14,23,613; appropriated Rs.22,962/- already remitted by the assessee; and confirmed interest and penalties as specified in the adjudication order. 3. The petitioner/assessee is a registerant under the category "tour operator service". During audit of the assessee's records it was observed that the assessee was providing inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s taxable value for taxable services provided. 6. With regard to domestic tour packages provided by the assesse, audit revealed that the assessee had excluded the value of the air tickets (received by the assessee as part of composite amounts received for services provided), from the value disclosed and offered to tax. Under provisions of Section 67 of the Act, a gross value received on taxable services provided ought to be reckoned as the taxable value of the service. The adjudication order is therefore prima facie unassailable on this aspect. 7. In respect of international tour packages, the assessee failed to disclose amounts received on these services provided, on the ground that these services are provided to foreign travel agents an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....king extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Act, was unlawful. The adjudicating authority held that the conduct of the assessee in mis-declaring the gross taxable value in its returns by withholding declaration of the value of air travel tickets received and international package tours, resulting in non/short payment of service tax is mis-declaration and constitutes wilful suppression of facts which would not have come to the notice of Revenue but for detailed audit of the assessee's records and therefore invocation of the extended period is justified. This is a matter which involves a detailed consideration of the facts, more appropriate at the final hearing. On behalf of the assessee it was contended t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on condition that the assessee should deposit Rs. 10 lakhs (Rupees Ten lakhs), to cover the prima facie liability of tax, interest and penalties on the aforesaid two components of the taxable service. 12. Along with the appeal filed on 15.3.2012, the assessee has filed the present application which could not be disposed of by this Tribunal. Meanwhile, Revenue recovered Rs.29,53,000/-. Aggrieved, the assessee approached the Karnataka High Court by way of WP No.13135/2013 and stated before the High Court that it is willing to permit Revenue to retain 50% of the said amount provided Revenue refunds the balance of 50% i.e. Rs.14,76,500/-. Recording this submission on behalf of the assessee, the High Court disposed of the writ petition (by the....