TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 577
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....01.01.2013 till 31.12.2013. 2. The petitioner submitted objections to the said show cause notice, whereupon the respondent-Commissioner of Central Tax, Bengaluru, has passed the Order-in-original on 10.10.2017 which is sought to be assailed by way of amendment Application No.1/2017 filed during the pendency of this petition on 27.11.2017. 3. The grounds urged in the Writ Petition for assailing the said show cause notice and the Order-in-original are that the petitioner had opted for a Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 (VCES Scheme 2013) announced by the respondent-Union of India, for payment of due Service Tax liability of the assessee in instalments before the end of December 2013 and June 2014 in two instalment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....012 , which fact has been admitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well, even though there is no period as such stipulated in the declaration VCES-1 Annexure 'C1' on the record. 6. The learned Counsel for the Revenue, therefore, argued that the Order-in-original passed in pursuance of the impugned show cause notice which was challenged in the present Writ Petition vide Annexure 'D' dated 13.10.2014 clearly discloses the fact of the petitioner, was filing its Declaration under the 'VCES Scheme 2013' vide paragraph-4 of the impugned order that since the said Service Tax of the petitioner was admitted only for the period upto December 2012, that the show cause notice as well as the order dated 10.10.2017 was for the subsequent pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contravention of the provisions of the Act/Rules, with intent to evade payment of Service Tax. Also, in the instant case, I find that the assessee has collected the Service Tax from the clients and not paid to the Govt. account, which has also been admitted by Shri K.G.Nandakumar, Asst. General Manager, Accounts and Finance in his statement dated 6.03.2014. They have also not filed the ST3 returns during the impugned period. Considering the gravity of offence committed in the evasion of tax involved in this SCN, which has been detailed in the SCN and also discussed at length supra, the case warrants imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 . I find that imposition of mandatory penalty is justified when malafide inten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mencing from January 2013. The liability of Service Tax depends upon the taxable event, which is the event or action of rendering of the services. The petitioner is engaged in the business of rendering taxable services of civil construction and civil contractors providing services relating to structural and civil works to various Builders and Developers. Th ere is no dispute before this Court about the admitted tax liability for Service Tax of the petitioner and the Voluntary Scheme availed by the petitioner was only to square up his admitted Service Tax liability for the past period from 01.10.2007 to 31.12.2012, which payment was allowed to be made in instalments in a staggered manner before December 2013 and June 2014, as per the provisi....