TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1173
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Section 73A thereof, for the period beginning from the 1st day of October, 2007 and ending on the 31st day of December, 2012 including a cess leviable thereon under any other Act for the time being in force, but not paid as on the 1st day of March, 2013. Sub-section (2) of Section 106 deals with the exigencies under which the designated authority by an order and for reasons to be recorded in writing, reject the declaration. Section 107 deals with the procedure for making a declaration and payment of tax dues. 3. Section 111 deals with failure to make a true declaration. It is reproduced below :- SECTION 111. Failure to make true declaration. (1) Where the Commissioner of Central Excise has reasons to believe that the declaration made by a declarant under this Scheme was substantially false, he may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, serve notice on the declarant in respect of such declaration requiring him to show cause why he should not pay the tax dues not paid or short-paid. (2) No action shall be taken under sub-section (1) after the expiry of one year from the date of declaration. (3) The show cause notice issued under sub-section (1) shall be deemed to have b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee vide their letter dated 15/07/2013 and subsequent letter dated 28/11/2013 had submitted the copy of Balance Sheet for the period financial year 2009-2010 to 2012-2013, Trial Balance for the period April, 2012 to December, 2012 and Ledger of receipts for the period financial year 2010-2011 to 2012-2013 (upto December) in support of their VCES declaration and on perusal of the same, it had been noticed that the assessee had received taxable receipts of Rs. 15,83,36,146/- in or in relation to providing of Tour Operator Service, Rail Travel Agent Service, Travel Agent for Booking of Passage (other than air/ral travel agent) and Air Travel Agent Service during the period from 2009-2010 to 2012-2013 (upto December), on which, the assessee was required to declare the tax dues of Rs. 37,03,793/- as per enclosed Annexure-A to show cause notice. However, the assessee had declared the tax dues of Rs. 3,67,358/- only for the period from April, 2010 to December, 2012, whereas, the assessee had received substantial amount during the period financial year 2009-2010 viz. income (sales) of Rs. 7,02,08,014/- from sales of domestic & international air tickets, miscellaneous receipt i.e. Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able on the assessee. The assessee never disclosed their taxable receipts to the department by way of submission of statutory ST-3 returns and in other manners. If the Superintendent, Service Tax Range-II, Group S to Z, Jaipur had not called for the documents from the assessee, the evasion of service tax to the tune of Rs. 33,36,435/- (Rs.37,03,793.00 - Rs. 3,67,358.00) would not come to the notice of the department. Thus, it appears that the assessee had suppressed the material facts from the department with intent to evade payment of service tax, hence the proviso to Section 73 (1) is invokable for demanding the service tax of Rs. 37,03,793/- for extended period of 5 years and the assessee is liable for penalty under Section 77 and Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994". 8. The appellant submitted a reply to the show cause notice on 25 July, 2014. The defence submitted have been noted in paragraph 7 of the order. Apart from contending that the assessee did not have any malafide intention to hide any fact or document relating to the business, the assessee also gave reasons as to why the service tax liability worked out under the show cause notice was not correct. The main reasons state....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pressing the taxable rate in the declaration was liable to be recovered with interest under the proviso to Section 73 and 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 readwith Section 111 of the Finance Act, 2013 and the service tax of Rs. 1,85,220/- already deposited was liable to be appropriated into the Government account as recovery of service tax. 10. Learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the declaration could not have been rejected under Section 105 (1) (e) and even otherwise the Commissioner could at best, if he had reason to believe that the declaration made was substantially false, for reasons to be recorded in writing serve a notice on the appellant in respect of such declaration requiring it to show cause why it should not pay the tax dues not paid or short paid. Learned Counsel also submitted that the appellant had not made any 'substantially false declaration' as the computation shown in Annexure A to the show cause notice was not correct. It has also been submitted that the appellant was not liable to pay any service tax for the financial year 2009-2010 and even for the subsequent financial years, the documents did not depict the correct picture. 11. The learned Autho....