2019 (11) TMI 1610

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve for the respondent ORDER The appellant is absent on call. Heard the ld. Authorised Representative for the Revenue and perused the records. 2. It appears that the appellant does not want to appear in person or through the counsel. The appellant was absent on the previous dates on 13.09.2019, 29.04.2019 and 6.3.2019. Further, the condonation of delay application was allowed ex parte by order d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....02,170/- plus cess, total Rs. 1,04,833/- for the period 2013-2014 to 2015-2016 along with interest . Further, the penalty was proposed under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Act. The show cause notice was adjudicated vide order-in-original dated 28.09.2017, on contest, the appellants stated that as the pre-requisite condition under GTA is not there as the appellant is not issuing any consignment note,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand observing that the demand relates to the period after the introduction of negative list of service w.e.f. 1.7.2012, observing that the appellant has not argued that their service is covered by Negative List or Mega Exemption Notification. Therefore, the service tax liability for the period, after the introduction of negative list of service i.e. 1.7.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atement, even for the post negative list period. As regards the contention of the appellant, rejected by the Adjudicating Authority, the same was rejected by the Appellate Authority observing that the appellant had neither taken registration nor filed ST-3 Returns. 5. Further, from the perusal of the Annexure A to show cause notice, it is evident that after allowing the abatement, the taxable val....