2015 (12) TMI 13

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Respondent : Shri Amresh Jain, DR ORDER Per: R K Singh: Appeal is filed against order-in-original dated 14.2.2008 in terms of which service tax demand of Rs. 1,14,77,883/- for the period Jan. 2002 to Dec. 2006 was confirmed along with interest. Penalties under Sections 76 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 were also imposed. 2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as under: Whil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t had not submitted any ST-3 returns thereby disabling Revenue from conducting proper scrutiny. In these circumstances, the figures and taxable value as provided by the appellant (Ann-B of Show Cause Notice) and figures of service tax payment reported by the office of CGM, Lucknow were relied upon to quantify the amount of impugned service tax short collected/short paid. Thus the total amount of s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant itself and it had not been able to reconcile the figures to justify its pleadings that the service tax was correctly paid. 4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. We find that the primary adjudicating authority relied upon the data provided by the appellants itself to arrive at the amount of service tax short paid. The appellant has not been able to show as to how those calcula....