TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1700
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x including Education Cess totally amounting to Rs. 14,98141/-was confirmed along with interest and equal amount of tax was also imposed as penalty. 2. The brief facts of the case are that during the course of Audit of the records of the Appellant for the Financial Years 2005-06 to 2008-09, it was found that the Appellant has paid transportation charges to various Transport Agencies, but not paid service tax on the total amount of Freight charges as reported in the Profit and Loss Accounts. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice dated 20.10.2010 was issued to the Appellant demanding short paid service tax amounting to Rs. 2,18,18,089/-, on the basis of differences appearing in the financial statements and Service Tax Returns. The Appella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y relied on the decision of CESTAT Delhi, Principal Bench in Vandana Global Ltd vs. Comm (Appeals), CGST, Raipur (Final Order no. 51135 / 2022, dated 02.12.2022 in Excise Appeal no. 53026 of 2018), wherein it was observed that If the audit points out some wrong assessment which was not pointed out by the officer scrutinizing the ER-1 return, the fault lies at the doorstep of the officer. It does not, by itself, establish that the Appellant had suppressed any facts.. Accordingly, they contended that the demand confirmed by invoking extended period of limitation is not sustainable. 5. The Appellant further submits that being a PSU, they can never have an intention to evade statutory duties. They cited the decision of the Tribunal in the case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... On adjudication, based on the reconciliation submitted by the Appellant, the adjudicating authority confirmed Rs. 14,98,141/- along with interest and penalty and dropped the remaining demands made in the Notice. We find that the Ld. Commissioner has confirmed the demand of Rs. 14,98,141/-on the basis of the findings made under para 7.6 and para 7.7 of the impugned order, which is reproduce below for ready reference:. 7.6 Liability of Service Tax included in Coal Transportation Charges: - (SI. No. (8) of the Tale-I) Deduction was claimed by the noticee as per serial No. 8 of Chartered Accountant Certificate for Rs. 85,84,691/- for 2006-07. The noticee claimed it as a wrong reporting in the year 2006-07. No supp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not given any categorical finding as to how the Appellants were liable to pay service tax, on the amount for which reconciliation was not accepted . 11. The Appellant submitted that the demand confirmed in the impugned order pertains to the period from 2005-06 to 2008-09. The Notice was issued on 20.10.2010, by invoking the extended period. The Appellant stated that in the entire proceedings, there is no findings that the Appellant have willfully evaded payment of Service Tax with an intent of fraud or suppression. In this context, they relied on the decision of CESTAT Delhi, Principal Bench in Vandana Global Ltd vs. Comm (Appeals), CGST, Raipur (Final Order no. 51135 / 2022, dated 02.12.2022 in Excise Appeal no. 53026 of 2018), wherein i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovision for normal period of limitation would be rendered otiose. 14. This submission cannot be accepted. There could be two or more views on the same issue and the assessee self-assesses duty as per its view and understanding. It cannot be expected to foresee what view the audit team may take sometime in the future and assess duty accordingly. The Excise Rules provide not only for self-assessment of duty and filing of returns by the assessee in ER-1, but also provide for scrutiny of the returns by the officers. Duty of excise is charged on excisable goods manufactured or produced in India (Section 3) but the duty becomes payable on removal (Excise Rule 4). The assessee has to selfassess (Excise Rule 6) the duty and pay it by the fifth d....