2015 (4) TMI 1111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Appellant. None, for the Respondent. ORDER Nobody is present on behalf of the respondent. Heard the learned AR. 2. The facts of the case briefly are that the appellant is engaged in the activity of civil construction, erection and commissioning services and is also registered with the Department for the works contracts services since 2007 but providing services since 2004. The Dep....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uction service, the demand worked out to Rs. 7,99,038/-. After adjustment with the excess duty paid, the liability worked out to Rs. 50,963/-. Demand in respect of works contract service was worked out to Rs. 24,38,810/- after deducting the payment of the appellant from the total demand of Rs. 29,65,782/-.The demand was raised invoking the extended period of limitation with proposal to impose pena....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Section 78 can be waived is not correct. It is submitted on behalf of the Revenue that benefit of reduced penalty of 25% of the tax demanded is an option extended to the assessee if the tax with interest and 25% penalty is paid within 30 days of the adjudication order. Once the assessee exercises the option of payment of 25% of the penalty, he deemed to have accepted the demand of Service tax mad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... matter has to be treated as closed. No doubt, there is an instruction issued by the Board that once the assessee pays the Service tax and interest and intimates the department of the same on the basis of assessment of tax liability of the Central Excise Officer no show cause notice for differential amount of Service tax or interest can be demanded after one year except where there is a case for i....