TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 437
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as well as various other services. A special audit of the accounts of assessee was ordered in terms of Section 72A of the Finance Act. The audit covered the period 2008-09 to 2011-12. After receipt of the report of the Special Auditor, the Department issued Show Cause Notice dated 22.04.2014 alleging that the assessee has failed to pay Service Tax under various categories of service. After receipt of the Special Audit Report and the Show Cause Notice, the assessee admitted the liability of Service Tax and paid up differential Service Tax amounting to Rs. 62,83,60,922/- for the period covered by the special audit. Further, the assessee also discharged the interest liability amounting to Rs. 1,54,07,921/- under Section 75 of the Act. The adj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tted that the adjudicating authority has refrained from imposing penalty since the entire Service Tax liability along with interest has already been paid even before the issue of Show Cause Notice. In this connection, he relied on the decision of the Tribunal in respect of the same assessee for a different period, vide Final Order No. 52501/2017 dated 20.03.2017. 6. It is not in dispute that the entire amount of Service Tax for the disputed period stands paid by the assessee along with the full interest liability, even before the issue of Show Cause Notice. The Tribunal in the decision relied by the assessee, has waived the penalty in similar circumstances. We reproduce below the observations of the Tribunal: "3. The ld. Commissioner has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction of the Act, and as such no penal action is required" 4. On going through the adjudicating order, we find that there is no element of suppression on the part of the appellant in defrauding the service tax. On pointing out the mistake that the appellant is liable to pay service tax, the amount of service tax in question was deposited by the appellant with interest. Thus, in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 73 ibid, there was no necessity for issuance of show cause notice, only for imposition of penalty." 7. By following the earlier order of the Tribunal, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue. 8. Next, we turn to the appeal filed by the assessee, in relation to the demand upheld with respect to the Show Cause Notice dated 23.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der Section 72. He also pointed out that the copies of the bills submitted by the learned Counsel were not for the period covered within the Show Cause Notice dated 23.05.2014 and hence, not relevant. Finally, he argued that the assessee has failed to establish that no service charge was covered during the period 2012-13 and hence, the demand may be upheld. 10. After hearing both sides and perusal of the record, we note that the demand stands raised under the category of "Business Support Services" on the commission allegedly received by the assessee on top of electricity charges recovered from the concessionaire. The claim of the assessee is that the practice of recovery of service charges was stopped by them and no such charges were reco....