2018 (8) TMI 1280

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lant assessee during the period September, 2004 to March, 2008 has to be recovered by them by invoking the extended period and demand of interest and also imposition of equivalent amount of penalty. During the pendency of the proceedings before the issuance of show cause notice the appellant assessee had discharged the amount of Rs. 68,08,639/- and balance amount prior to issuance of show cause notice along with interest. Show cause notice was issued for the confirmation of demand and appropriation of the amounts so paid by the appellant/assessee. Appellant/assessee contested the matter on limitation and argued that penalty should not be imposed as the short payment for the period involved was due to calculation error. The Adjudicating Auth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sion of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore Vs. Motor World [2012 (27) STR 225] for the proposition that non-obstante clause of Section 80 can be invoked if there is a reasonable cause. It is his submission that in the case in hand, there was reasonable cause as the entire demand is due to clerical error occurred and can be set aside on the ground of limitation. He relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Trans Engineers India Pvt. Ltd., [2015 (40) STR (490)] for the proposition that extended period cannot be invoked based upon the second audit report for the period in question, also relies upon Garrison Polysacks P. Ltd., [2013 (292) ELT 513] and Suvikram Plastex (P) Ltd.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed evaded and is correctly confirmed by the lower authorities by invoking extended period. 7. We find from the records, that the appellant assessee had contested only warrant to impose penalties in case of incorrect calculation of service tax before the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority has proceeded ahead on the ground that the appellant assessee being in an organized sector should not have maintained the records in the form in which they are to be maintained are left to the assessee and error in calculating the tax liability has to be construed as willful mis-statement and suppression with intention to evade payment of service tax that because audit of the records has taken place does not mean that the intention to eva....