2025 (5) TMI 2164

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../RBL/2021 dated 30.11.2021 wherein following has been held:- "ORDER (i) I confirm the demand of Service Tax amounting Rs. 2,96,582/- (Two Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Two only) including Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess under Section 73 (1) of the Act. (ii) I order to recover interest on the confirm amount of service Rs. 2,96,582/ (Two Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Two only) under Section 75 of the Act. iii) I impose the penalty of Rs. 2,96,582/- (Two Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Two only) ( upon them under section 78 of the Act for the failure to pay service tax and suppressing the facts and value of taxable service with intend to evade payment of service tax; (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder section 75 the ibid. (ii) Penalty under Section 77 (1) & (2) of the Finance Act, 1994 should not be imposed upon M/s for contravention of various provisions of Finance Act, 1994 & Rules made there under as discussed above. (iii) Penalty should not be imposed upon them under Section 78 of the Act, for the suppression of facts from the department with intent to evade payment of service tax. (iv) fee should not be demanded from them under Rule 7C of the Rule read with Sec 70 of the Act." 2.6 The said show cause notice was adjudicated as per the Order-in-Original dated 30.11.2021 referred in para 1 above. 2.7 Aggrieved appellant have filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) which has been dismissed as per the impugned order. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ority has no other option to decide the case on the basis of record available in file. Thus, I find no force in the contention of the appellant that the adjudicating authority has not followed principle of natural justice. 4.2 The appellant has contested that they have deposited service tax amounting to Rs.3,55,033/ during the disputed period but in the ST-3 return they have shown Rs. 24,500/- by mistake. Thus, there is no short payment of service tax. I observe that the appellant has produced a print out taken from ACES system showing payment of service tax amounting to Rs. 2,67,033/- dated 26.05.2015 Rs. 24,500/- dated 25.09.2015 and Rs. 63,500/- dated 10.10.2015. I observe that Education cess and SH Education Cess were paid in the cha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is a clear case of suppression of facts and contravention of the statutory provisions, with intent to evade payment of Service Tax. Thus, penalty of Rs.2,96,582/- imposed by the adjudicating authority under Section 78 of the Act is justified. 4.4 The appellant has not maintained books & accounts, contravenes various provisions of Act and also failed to produce documents called for by the department, therefore, penalty of Rs. 10,000/ each imposed under Section 77, 77(1)(c) & 77(2) of the Act are justified." 4.3 I find that the figures of show cause notice or Order-in-Original do not tally with ITR return filed by the appellant. The copy of the ITR return which has been filed by the appellant along with the appeal and also was made avai....