2017 (4) TMI 949

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....9.2004 and certain documents were recovered. Statement of the Proprietor was recorded. Thereafter, the respondent filed ST-3 returns for the period April 2000 to September 2004 along with payment of service tax of Rs. 5,08,392/-. The respondent had filed copies of income tax returns for the years 2001-02 to 2003-04 and later submitted copies of bills raised on their clients pertaining to period 2000-01 to 2002-03. On gathering further intelligence that respondents had not disclosed the true facts, the department collected data from the clients of the respondents, and compared the information provided by respondents. It was revealed that respondents had actually received higher taxable value than that was disclosed in their returns. As it ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and vide order impugned herein, the Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the penalty imposed under Section 78 holding that as the respondent paid Rs. 29,64,908/- in respect of first show cause notice during the period of investigation the penalty has to be revised accordingly and reduced to that extent. In respect of second show cause notice, the penalty was thus reduced to Rs. 7,98,462/-. The department is now before the Tribunal against the reduction of penalty. 6. On behalf of the department, the Ld. AR Sh. M. Chandra Bose reiterated the grounds of appeal. He adverted to the discussions in para 59 of the Order-in-Original and argued that the adjudicating authority had categorically held that there i....