TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 880
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otice sent by registered post has been served upon the appellant on March 02, 2023. 2. Earlier, the case was listed three times on March 24, 2023, May 08, 2023 and July 19, 2023, but no one had appeared on behalf of the appellant. Today, when the matter has been called out, no one has appeared on behalf of the appellant. 3. We are, therefore, proceeding to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the learned authorized representative appearing for the Department. 4. The appellant is registered with the Central Excise Department under Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 for providing services under the category of site formation and clearance services. Intelligence received by the Department indicated that the appellant was not regu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rest. He further imposed a penalty of Rs. 48,27,074/- under section 76 (1) of the Act being 10% of the service tax demanded on "site formation services". He further held that only 25% of the imposed penalty needs to be paid, if it is paid within 30 days from the date of receipt of the impugned order. 6. Insofar as the service tax on rent a cab service and manpower supply service is concerned, he confirmed a demand of Rs. 2,15,539/- as proposed in the SCN along with interest under section 75. He imposed a penalty of Rs. 21,554/- being 10% of this amount under section 76 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994 and further held that if the penalty is paid within 30 days only 25% of the penalty imposed needs to be paid. He also imposed penalty of Rs. 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er section 76 (1) should also be reduced from Rs. 48,27,074/- to Rs. 40,80,886/-. 11. Learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue submits that the appellant had not contested the demands either before the Original Authority or in this appeal on merits and it is only contesting the demand on the ground of limitation. He further submits that the SCN was issued on 29.04.2014 covering the period July 2012 to September 2013 without invoking the extended period of limitation. During the relevant time, the normal period of limitation for issuing the notice was 18 months from the relevant date. The relevant date is the date on which the Return was filed for a particular period or, if no return is filed, the last date on which the Return sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duction of penalty as prayed for by the appellant. As far as the assertion of the appellant that an amount of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- which was deposited by it during investigation and not appropriated in the impugned order is concerned, learned authorized representative submits that the appellant is correct since it is recorded in paragraph 12 (i) of the SCN that this amount was deposited and it was proposed to be appropriated, but the impugned order does not appropriate the amount so deposited. 14. We have considered the submissions made by the learned authorized representative and the grounds of the appeal and perused the records. 15. As far as the assertion that part of the demand was issued beyond the normal period of limitation is con....