2018 (2) TMI 1445

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....man and Ms. Cynduja Crishnan, Advocates (AR) for the Appellant Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Smt. Archana Wadhwa The service tax demand stands confirmed against the appellant for the period 2006   07 by raising a show cause notice dated 4.8.2008 under the category of Intellectual Property Right Service. 2. The appellant had strongly assail....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed SCN under  consulting engineer service  by the Commissioner of Service Tax on an identical issue which arose from the same agreement for the earlier period, that there is no suppression of facts and hence extended period of time limit is not invocable in the instant case. I find that the issue pertaining to earlier period had not attained finality. The appellant had argued further tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Department until the audit officers exposed it from the note attached to the balance sheet of 2006   07. The very action of not intimating about the payments made even after issue of SCN in 2004 shows that they had suppressed the facts with an intention to evade payment of tax. Hence, I told that this is a clear case of suppression of facts and the lower adjudicating authority had rightl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....owever, subsequently, with the introduction of Intellectual Property Service, being a taxable service, fresh proceedings were initiated by invoking the larger period of limitation. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nizam Sugar Factory Vs. Collector of Central Excise, A.P. reported in 2006 (97) ELT 465 (SC) has categorically held that when the first show cause notice is issued, all the fa....