2024 (8) TMI 606

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ipur - 302 005 (Raj.) is allowed. 2. This appeal has been filed by M/s Ganpati Plaza Owner's Maintenance Society against order-in-appeal No. 69 (RLM) ST/ JPR/2023 dated 01.03.2023. 3. Heard both sides. 4. It transpires from the facts of the case that order-in-original No. 43/DEM/ST/DC/Div-C/2021-22 dated 30.09.2021 was passed wherein the demand of service tax and interest against the appellant was confirmed. The penalty under section 77 (1) (a), 77 (2) and section 78 was also imposed. The penalty under section 78 was imposed @ 50% of the demand. Both, the appellants as well as Revenue challenge the said order before the Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) vide order No. 37 (RLM) ST/JPR/2023 dated 16.02.2023 set aside the entir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dic returns, second SCN invoking extended period would be difficult to sustain as the department comes in possession of all the facts after the time of first SCN. Therefore, as a matter of abundant precaution, it is desirable that after the first SCN invoking extended period, subsequent SCNs should be issued within the normal period of limitation". 11. I find that in the case of ECE Industries Limited versus Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi {2004 (164) E.L.T. 236 (S.C.)} in 4 and 5 para Hon'ble Supreme Court held that - "4. In the case of M/s. P & B Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise reported in [2003 (2) SCALE 390], the question was whether the extended period of limitation could be invoked where the Depar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atter. It has been held that in such circumstances, it could not be said that there was any wilful suppression or mis-statement and that therefore, the extended period under Section 11A could not be invoked. 5. In our view, the principles laid down in above case fully apply here. As earlier proceedings in respect of same subject-matter were pending adjudication it could not be said that there was any suppression and the extended period under Section 11A was not available." On the ratio laid down in this judgment it must be held that once the earlier Show Cause Notice, on similar issue has been dropped, it can no longer be said that there is any suppression. The extended period of limitation would thus not be available. We are unable to ....