TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 1364
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lines during the relevant period at the air ports. A show cause notice was issued alleging that appellant had not discharged the service tax liability correctly and a demand of Rs. 26,28,638/- towards service tax for the period 2008-09 to 2012-13 along with applicable interest was proposed in the show cause notice. It was also proposed to impose penalties under sections 76, 77 & 78 of Chapter V of Finance Act, 1994 on the appellant. After hearing the appellant and his explanation, the lower authority in his Order-in-Original dated 21.02.2014, agreed that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax prior to July 2010 in respect of the airport services and therefore dropped the demand to that extent. As far as the demand for the period su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommissioner (Appeals). For the period subsequent to 01.07.2010, he explained that the difference in service tax occurred as they were reckoning service tax and paying the same when they received the amount for the service, while they should have considered the amount payable and paid service tax whenever the amount was accrued to them, whether or not the amount was actually received. It was his contention that this was a genuine mistake by them and they should not be penalized for it. It is his further contention that since they were paying service tax on the basis of receipts instead of accruals, they would have paid the service tax on these amounts subsequently at some point of time and hence the entire matter may be remanded back to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....159) (S.C.)] (k) Sumeet Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Surat [2004(164) E.L.T 335 (Tri.- Mumbai)]. 5. Ld. DR, on the other hand, reiterated the arguments made in the Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. He said that there is no dispute on the facts of the case and whatever relief the appellant was entitled to, was already granted by the original authority in his Order-in-Original. Admittedly, the appellant has not shown the true value of the services rendered by him in his ST-3 returns nor paid the service tax on it. In the scheme of self-assessment, it is the duty and responsibility of the appellant assessee to ensure to disclose the true value of the services rendered as per rules and pay service tax accordingly and also to file ST-3 retu....