2017 (12) TMI 1310

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t ORDER This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 21.12.2016 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise and Service Tax, Raipur, upholding the adjudged demand confirmed in the original order dated 13.10.2015. 2. In this case, Service Tax demand was confirmed against the appellant on the ground that during the period from 01.04.2011 to 30.06.2012, it had used common in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....No. (e) of Section 66 D of the Finance Act, 1994 under negative list as amended vide Finance Act, 2012. Thus, he submitted that the Service Tax demand cannot be confirmed against the appellant. He further submitted that the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked, inasmuch as, there was no element of mis-statement, suppression or contravention of cenvat provisions, with intent to evade of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....empted service in Section 66 D of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended by Finance Act, 2012. Thus, in such eventuality, allegation of suppression, mis-statement etc. cannot be leveled against the appellant for invocation of the extended period of limitation for issuance of the SCN. Further, the appellant is a registered assessee under the Service Tax statute and had complied with the statutory provisi....