TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 1180
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cluding renting of immovable property services, to M/s Narayana Educational Society but had not obtained service tax registration nor paid the applicable service tax. 2. Based on information obtained from M/s Narayana Educational Society a show cause notice was issued proposing to treating the income received from M/s Narayana Educational Society by the appellant during the financial year 2014-15 as the basis for arriving at the income for the subsequent period 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 up to June, 2017 as per the Section 72 of the Finance Act and proposing a demand of Rs. 5,87,909/-. The show cause notice was confirmed in full on adjudication wherein an equal penalty of Rs. 5,87,909/- was also imposed. 3. On appeal before Commissi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cordingly, he recalculated the total service tax liability for the period from October 2014 to April 2016 as Rs. 2,38,972/- out of total demand confirmed by the Original Adjudicating Authority, as per the calculation below: Financial Year Rental Income from M/s Narayana Educational Society Taxable value after allowing Cum Tax Benefit Service Tax (inclusive of Cesses payable) 2014-15 (from October 2014) 6,21,816 5,53,414 68,402 2015-16 13,05,804 11,40,440 1,65,364 2016-17 (April, 2016) 41,111 35,905 5,206 Total Service Tax Payable 2,38,972 5. The Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that they have already admitted the liability to pay this re-determined service tax and they have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yg. & Ptg. Mills (P) Ltd., [2014 (305) ELT 442 (Guj)] 3. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Aurangabad Vs WIPRO Ltd., [2011 (269) ELT 490 (Bom)] 7. As regards their claim of 50% penalty instead of 100%, he points out that there is nothing on record to show that they maintained the records in detail relating to the services provided to educational institutions. 8. Heard the parties and perused the documents. 9. In so far as the first issue concerned as to whether the penalty of 25% can be extended in respect of total demand finally confirmed in terms of Commissioner (Appeals) or otherwise, I find that the provisions are quite clear. As per the second proviso to Section 78(1) there is a provision that where the servic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reduced penalty within a time that is beyond what is stipulated in the third proviso to Section 78(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. The statute is explicit. The second proviso states that the payment of the service tax and interest has to be paid within "paid within thirty days from the date of communication of order of the Central Excise Officer determining such service tax" and the third proviso states that the reduced penalty that has been determined also has to be paid "within the period of thirty days referred to" in the second proviso. The option to pay the reduced penalty comes to an end on the expiry of thirty days from the date of communication of the adjudication order. It is only where the service tax is enhanced by an appellate auth....