2017 (8) TMI 795

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Appellant Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The appellants were engaged in advertising agency business of designing and setting up of advertisement hoardings. In the year 2005, that there was lot of restrictions as well as erection of holders in public places which caused severe loss of the business to the appellant by which they were not in a posit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....77 for the entire period 8,34,069 Interest of Rs. 8,92,916 paid   Hence the appellants are now before the Tribunal. 2. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel Shri G.Natarajan submitted that the appellant is not contesting the liability to pay service tax and is confining the challenge on the penalties imposed. He submitted that the appellant could not pay the service tax only....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s 6/2003 to 6/2005 Section 76 For the period 4/2005 to 6/2005 on the delayed payment of ST 4/2005 to 9/2006 Section 78 For the period 4/2005 to 6/2005 for the unpaid ST 10/2006 to 3/2008 Section 76   4/2008 to 9/2008 Section 78     4. When the department has not been able to show any fraud, suppression on the part of the appellant to evade s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r putting up hoardings and there were litigations pending even before the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the said issue and that this caused much financial constraints by which they could not deposit the service tax. Taking into consideration the submission made on behalf of the appellant, we are of the view that there is no evidence to establish that there was any suppression of facts and therefore the....