2007 (5) TMI 138

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant challenges the order of the Commissioner made on 18-12-2006, confirming the demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 22,13,598/- under Section 73 read with Sections 66 and 68 of the Finance Act 1944, ordering interest on that amount under Section 75 of the Act and imposing penalty of Rs. 100/- per day subject to the maximum equal to the amount of service tax, under Section 76, besides imp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was found that the summary sheet of the appellant did not meet with the mandatory requirement of correct return, and there were no details like invoice nos., names etc. It does appears that the appellant has documentary evidence of contemporaneous nature to plead adjustments and because of the default of its officers, relevant evidence could not be adduced before the Commissioner during the heari....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... not adduced, due to the lapse on the part of officers/staff of the company, before the Commissioner, and accepting the request made on behalf of the applicant to make a deposit of suitable amount, it is ordered that on the appellants' depositing Rs. 2 lakhs before the Commissioner within two weeks from today, the Commissioner will hear the matter afresh after allowing the parties to produce the r....