2016 (4) TMI 1037

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sept 2006), did not discharge Service Tax correctly on the gross taxable value received from their customers, hence a demand notice was issued to them on 03.07.2007 for recovery of short paid Service Tax of Rs. 24,10,096/- with proposal for imposition of penalty and recovery of interest also. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed and penalty was imposed. Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The learned Commissioner (Appeals), after analyzing the issues raised and evidences on record, upheld the order of the Adjudicating authority. Hence, the present Appeal. 3. The learned Advocate Shri R.C. Saxena, for the Appellant submitted that the demand was confirmed merely on the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Hon'ble Gujrat High court in the case of Commissioner Vs. Krishnaram Dyeing and Finishing Works 2013 (298) ELT 376(Guj.). 5. Per contra, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue has submitted that the issue of chargeability of Service Tax under the category rent-a-cab operator service; when the charges are collected per kilometer basis, is no more res integra, in view of the recent judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax Vs Vijay Travels - 2014 (36) STR 513 (Guj.). However, in the present case, the extended period of limitation is rightly invoked and confirmed against the Appellant, as the Appellant had suppressed the correct value received from their customers during the relevan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ived from their customers, and short paid the Service Tax. However, he has fairly conceded that the Appellants are eligible to pay 25% of the penalty imposed on compliance of the condition prescribed under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. 7. Heard both the sides and perused the record.We have carefully considered the evidences on record, analysed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) while upholding the order of the Adjudicating authority. The demand had been issued for recovery of the Service Tax short paid by the Appellant in rendering the rent-a-cab operator service during the period 2002-03 to 2006-07 (upto Sept. 2006); the dispute was not on the chargeability of Service Tax. We agree with the contention of the Ld. A.R. for the Reve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....red Accountants certificate produced by the Appellant in support of their claim that the gross receipts shown in the balance sheets include the value of materials supplied to the customers, could not be accepted, as it has no relation to their plea that the figures shown in the balance sheet are inflated for various business purposes. The learned Commissioner(Appeals) in Para 6.4, 7 and 7.1 recorded his conclusion as under:- "6.4 In view of the discussion in Para 6 and its various sub-paras above, I therefore find that the Appellants contention of the income from rent-a-cab business as shown in the Balance Sheet/I.T. Return being inflated is not correct and cannot be accepted. 7. Thus, in the present case, it is clearly e....