2017 (1) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent. ORDER The above appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the confirmation of demand under Section 75 and imposition of penalty under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.  2.  Brief facts are that during the course of verification of the accounts for the period from 07/2009 to 01/2011, it was found that the appellant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd imposed equal amount of penalty, besides the penalties imposed under the Section 77.  The appellants filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the same.  Hence this appeal.  3.  On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Counsel Sh. G. Natrajan submitted that the appellants are not liable to pay interest from the date of receiving the advances for the reason that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nces were shown in the balance sheet as liabilities.    4.  On behalf of the department the Ld. AR, Shri. P.S. Reddy reiterated the findings in the impugned order.  He submitted that the appellants have received the amounts and are consideration for the services provided and therefore are liable to pay the service tax, and interest thereon and also penalties.   &nb....