2016 (6) TMI 723

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant : Ms. Rinky Arora, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Ranjan Khanna, DR ORDER Appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal dated 04.07.2011, which upheld the Order-in-Original dated 19.11.2010 in terms of which, inter alia, service tax demand of Rs. 36,935/- for the period 01.07.2003 to 31.03.2005 along with interest was confirmed on the ground that the appellant provided Business ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the impugned order the issue of giving benefit of Section 80 ibid  while still upholding the demand is lucidly analysed. 4.  We have considered the contentions of both sides.  At the outset, it is to be mentioned that it is not disputed that the service provided by the appellant clearly falls under BAS covered under Section 65 (19) ibid.  Regarding the contention that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wer authorities regarding suppression of facts and the appellant did not argue about the untenability of the said finding except to say that invocation of Section 80 ibid disables invocation of extended period for confirmation of demand.  We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in Para 7.2 of the impugned order analysed the issue as under:- "7.2  I find that the plea of the appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....it of section 80 has been extended to a party in cases involving demand under extended period.  Three such decisions are being cited below: I. 2004(10)LCX0012 IN THE CESTAT, NORTHERN BENCH, NEW DELHI [LARGER BENCH] ETA ENGINEERING LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI II. 2008(03) LCX 0268 IN THE CESTAT, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, BANGALORE Sri Venkatesw....