2019 (9) TMI 221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....KARWAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For The Appellant : Shri Sita Ram, Consultant For The Respondent : Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Superintendent, Authorised Representative ORDER PER: ARCHANA WADHWA After hearing both the sides, we find that the demand of Service Tax of Rs. 13,34,188/- stands confirmed against the appellant along with imposition of penalty of identical amount on the findings tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the same was not being paid to the exchequer. 3. On the above basis, proceedings were initiated against the appellant vide Show Cause Notice dated 20.04.2013. The same was confirmed by the Original Authority as also upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). Hence, the present appeal. 4. Ld. Consultant - Shri Sita Ram appearing on behalf of the appellant has assailed the impugned order on merits ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the said Services. He also assails the impugned order on time bar by submitting that the appellant is a proprietory Unit and as a small Unit providing services to Service Provider. As they were not aware of their liability to pay Service Tax, the same was not being collected by them from M/s IFFCO. He submits that there is no evidence of any suppression or mala-fide intent on their part so as ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arted paying Service Tax regularly. Further, we note that the appellant was not collected any Service Tax from M/s IFFCO. Further, the scrutiny of the agreement also reveals that there was a clause to the effect that if Service Tax is applicable, that will be payable by M/s IFFCO on production of documentary evidence. This clearly shows that the Service Tax liability shall be borne by M/s IFFCO, i....