TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1011
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces of Works contract/Construction services other than residential complex, including commercial/industrial buildings or civil structures, Erection, commissioning and installation Service, Other Taxable Services-Other than the 119 listed. 2.2 On the basis of information received from Income Tax Department under third party data exchange policy (Form-26AS), it was observed that appellant has received a some of Rs.59,85,579/- on account of providing declared services. On comparison of the said figures with the ST-3 return for the relevant period, it was observed that appellant had short paid/not paid the service tax due in respect of consideration so received. 2.3 Jurisdictional Range Superintendent vide his letter and e-mail dated 24.12.2020 asked the appellant to provide following documents- "1. Copy of 26AS for the financial years (2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18) 2. Copy of Income Tax returns filed (2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18) 3. ST-3 Returns (2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017 to June 2017) 4. Balance Sheet (2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17) 5. Trial Balance (April 2017 to June 2017) 6. Partnership Deed." 2.4 Information as called for was not p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....40,000/- under Section 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 7C of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and also read with Section 174 of the Central GST Act, 2017and order to recover from the Noticee. (v) I impose a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on Noticee under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 of the Central GST Act, 2017 for contravention of the Act." 2.7 Aggrieved appellant have filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) which has been dismissed as per the impugned order referred in para 1 above. 2.8 Aggrieved appellant have filed this appeal. 3.1 I have heard Shri Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel appearing for the appellants and Shri A.K. Choudhary Authorized Representative for the revenue. 3.2 Arguing for the appellant learned Counsel submits that- * Demand for the period March, 2014 to September, 2014 for which the return was due and filed in the month of October, 2014 has been made beyond the period of 5 years as the show cause notice has been issued on 30.12.2020, therefore, this demand is not sustainable even the extended period of limitation. * Demand made for the period October, 2014 to March, 2015 also would have become time bar by the da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rds were available in his office and he is not proving the same, is not sustainable as under the provisions of Finance Act, the registered person is responsible for keeping record safely and to produce before the officer as and when called for. As regards for nature or classification of service provided by appellant, the contention of the appellant that they could lay hands on some documents from the office of earlier advocate titled SUMMARY SHEET FOR SUB CONTRACTOR'S PAYMENT, issued by M/S. TRF Limited, No other records except some TR-6 challans showing payment of service tax were found. The contention of the appellant that they had provided the same service to two other recipients namely M/S. Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd. and M/S. Jubilant Agri Consumer Products Ltd. at Gajraula during the financial year 2014-15 can't be accepted as for nature of work done, contracts and bills are required which they failed to submit. In view of the above, I hold that appellant is liable for payment of service tax on full value at applicable rates which comes to Rs 7,39,181/-. (ii). Now I examine the contention of the appellant regarding non-sustainability of the subject demand as it is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in statutory time limit of 31.12.2020, extended by the said Notification, and the date of service is also not contested by the appellant as beyond 31.12.2020, hence I find that the notice was served upon them on or before 31.12.2020. Thus, for the demand for the year 2014-15, so based on the third party data/information received from the Income Tax Department, the issuance of the SCN on 30.12.2020 by invoking the extended period of time limitation, the provisions of which are squarely applicable to the facts of the subject case, supra, is very well within the statutory time limitation. Thus, I find that the said contentions of the appellant are unfounded on factual and legal terms. (v). Now I examine the element of the invocation of the extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 73(1) of finance Act, 1994, and imposition of penalty under section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. I find that the appellant did neither submit any contract/ bill against which services were provided. I have examined the copy Service tax return for period 01.04.2014 to 30.09.2014, submitted by them, wherein they have shown nil value in respective column but have paid service tax Rs 5963/- vide....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... period of limitation sustainable There being suppression of fact, penalty under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994 warranted - Interest payable Appropriate penalties under Sections 76. 77 and 78 ibid payable - Sections 73 and 75 ibid. (paras 11, 12, 13] This order was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and heldin Us Judgement that Demand-Limitation- Extended period invokable for fallure of registered assessee to furnish details and to pay service tax under Rule reported in [2016(44)STRJ276(SC) (II). CAIRN ENERGY INDIA PVT. LTD.VS COMMR. OF C. EX. & CUS., VISAKHAPATNAM-II (2019 (27) G.S.T.L. 363 (Tri. Hyd.)) Held Demand -Limitation Extended period of Assessee violating conditions of Finance Act, 1994 and Rules and failed to pay Service Tax with intent to evade tax Extended period of limitation applicable - Affirmed by the Hon'able Supreme Court in case reported in 2020 (32) G.S.T.L.. J40 (S.C.)] (III). LAKHAN SINGH & CO. VS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXICSE, JAIPUR, [2016 (46) S.T.R. 297 (Tri. Del.)] Held- Demand Limitation Suppression - Suppression with intent to evade payment of duty It is seldom done by actions leaving trails Hence, "positive act" of suppression c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said return shall pay to the credit of the Central Government, for the period of delay of- (i) fifteen days from the date prescribed for submission of such return, an amount of five hundred rupees; (ii) beyond fifteen days but not later than thirty days from the date prescribed for submission of such return, an amount of one thousand rupees; and (iii) beyond thirty days from the date prescribed for submission of such return an amount of one thousand rupees plus one hundred rupees for every day from the thirty first day till the date of furnishing the said return. Provided that the total amount payable in terms of this rule shall not exceed twenty thousand rupees. ST-3 FOR THE PERIOD DUE DATE OF FILING RETURN ACTUAL DATE OF FILING RETURN DELAY April 14 to September 14 14.11.2014 23.10.2014 0 October 14 to March 15 25.04.2015 Not filed yet --- In view of the above, I find that the appellant has submitted copy of ST-3 return for the period April 2014 to September 2014 with in prescribed time, hence no late fees is chargeable and for ST-3 for the return from October 2014 to March 2015, which they have not filed, they were liable for late fee of Rs, 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....try is returning to normalcy. Almost all the Courts and Tribunals are functioning either physically or by virtual mode. We are of the opinion that the order dated 15.03.2020 has served its purpose and in view of the changing scenario relating to the pandemic, the extension of limitation should come to an end. 2. We have considered the suggestions of the learned Attorney General for India regarding the future course of action. We deem it appropriate to issue the following directions: - 1. In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 shall stand excluded. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 15.03.2020, if any, shall become available with effect from 15.03.2021. 2. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 15.03.2021. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 15.03.2021, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply. 3. The pe....