2017 (3) TMI 1363

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ns). The Department entertained the view that service tax in respect of GTA services for the transportation of traded goods is inadmissible. Show-cause notices dt. 01/07/201 and 01/02/2012 were issued for the period from April 2006 to February 2011 alleging the irregular availment of credit and proposing to demand a sum of along with interest and also proposing to impose penalty. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand, interest and imposed equal amount of penalty. The appellants filed appeal and vide the order impugned herein, the Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the confirmation of demand and interest, however set aside the penalty imposed. Against this order, the Department filed an appeal before the Tribunal an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wards. 3. Against this, the learned AR Shri Guna Ranjan submitted that the appellant is guilty of wilfull suppression of facts and therefore, the extended period has been rightly invoked for raising the demand. He adverted to the show-cause notice dt. 01/07/2011 and submitted that the Department had issued a letter dt. 19/05/2009 requesting the appellant to furnish data for quantification of the demand. The appellant failed to furnish the data and the same was provided to the Department only vide letter dt. 17/01/2011. That thereafter the initial show-cause notice dt. 01/07/2011 was issued to the appellant. The appellant is therefore guilty of wilfull suppression of facts by not cooperating with the Department. That the demand raised for t....