2018 (12) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fly the facts of the present case are that the appellant was a registered service provider and providing taxable service under the category 'Cable Operator'. During the year 2002-2003 to 2004-2005 the service provider suppressed the actual amount of cable service charges in the guise of repair charges and new connection material charges and for purchase of spare parts and thereby short paid service tax for the period from August, 2002 to March, 2005. Further, from April, 2005 to September, 2005 the taxable value worked out more than the declared value and thus resulted in short payment of service tax. On these allegation a show-cause notice was issued and after following the due process, the original authority confirmed the service tax amou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-in-Original. He further submitted that other submissions of the appellants have also not been considered by the original authority and the same were raised before the Commissioner (Appeals) also but the Commissioner (Appeals) has also not given any finding on the same. He further submitted that the adjudicating authority has held in the operative part of the order that the differential value of Rs. 9,54,890/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Fifty Four Thousand Eight Hundred and Ninety only) for the period from August 2002 to March 2005 and differential value of Rs. 1,85,392/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Two only) for the period from April 2005 to September 2005 is liable for a tax of Rs. 1,07,267/- (Rupees One Lakh Se....