2016 (1) TMI 668

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....harges towards services rendered to M/s. Philips Electronics India Limited, but have not paid the Service Tax due to the department, during the period 2007-08 to September 2011. The original adjudicating authority vide the impugned Order-in-Original confirmed the service tax liability of Rs. 36,60,320/- alongwith interest, and imposed equivalent penalty under Section 78, and also penalties under Section 76 and 70 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned Order-in-Appeal upheld the same. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants are before us. 2. Heard both sides. The learned Counsel for the appellant at the outset itself submits that they are not contesting the liability of service tax and interest, which they have a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ustained. 4. On consideration of the arguments of both sides and careful perusal of the records, we find that the lower authorities have already considered the submissions made by the appellant at the time of consideration whether penalty should be imposed on the appellant. Commissioner (Appeals) in his impugned order has observed as follows:- "9. The appellant's main contention is that that they have not deposited the tax amount with the Government due to poor financial conditions and that they are proprietary firm and running one man show, leading to confusing situation beyond control. In this regard, on going through the records, I find that the appellant was charging and collecting Service Tax from their customer but had not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Government due to poor financial conditions. The plea of financial hardships cannot be taken as sufficient reason either for their failure to make the payments of the tax or for not levying any penalties on them. I find that they have not only collected the service tax from the service receiver but have defaulted in depositing the same with the Government. They also did not file any returns with the Department and resorted to evasion of service tax by suppression of facts and will-fully not disclosing the details. They also did not disclose correct taxable values in the returns filed by them even after the start investigations against them. All these acts of contravention on the part of the appellant are specifically covered under the c....