2019 (5) TMI 1491

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ranjan, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER: ARCHANA WADHWA On matter being called neither anybody appeared nor is there any adjournment request, in spite of notice having been sent well in advance. Accordingly, we have heard learned A.R. appearing for the Revenue and have gone through the impugned orders. 2. The appellant is registered with the Service Tax Departme....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 78 of the Finance Act. In addition penalty of Rs. 60,000/- was imposed under Section 70 of the Act read with Rule 7C of the Cenvat Credit Rules. On appeal the said order of the Original Adjudicating Authority was upheld by Commissioner (Appeals) and hence the present appeal. 4. It is seen that the appellant had not disputed the fact of providing of services and have simplicitor submitted that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ould not pay service tax due to financial crisis. It is therefore evident that the appellant knew fully well that the services provided by him to the cement companies were liable to service tax. Despite this the appellant neither paid the service tax nor filed the returns. I do not find any cogent explanation or reason for not paying the service tax. The appellant has not mentioned any bona fide r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are not applicable in the case of the appellant, as claimed by him. The demand of service tax alongwith the interest is therefore sustainable. Consequently, penalty of equal amount imposed under Section 78 of the Act is also upheld." 5. As it is not the appellant's case that the services provided by them were excluded from the areena of service tax or the same were exempted under any particula....