2017 (5) TMI 340

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri V D Gaware, Assistant Manager of appellant Shri A B Kulgod, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER Per: M V Ravindran This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No:73/BR-73/ST/Th-I/2011 dated 31/10/2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane  I. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records it transpi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ds the tax, demanded interest and also imposed penalties under section 76, 77 and 78. 4. This matter was called out for hearing on 19/10/2016 on which date a plea was made that appellant being a Government of Maharashtra undertaking, could not have had any intention to evade service tax liability. It was also submitted that appellant have mis-understood/mis-interpreted the law but subsequently,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant, although belatedly. 6. Learned Authorised Representative reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 7. The issue that arises for consideration is whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant, which is a Government of Maharashtra undertaking, is required to be penalized under section 75A, 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 for non-discharge of the s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a deliberate attempt to not to discharge service tax liability to the Government. 9. We find that this reasoning of the adjudicating authority seems to be mis-directed as it is a known fact that service tax liability on the services rendered by C&F Agents were placed in the hands of the recipient of service by retrospective amendment. It is also a fact that during the relevant period there was ....