TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 880
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Interest on the unpaid service tax amount of Rs.1,42,43,376/- under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. 3. I hereby impose a Penalty of Rs.1,42,43,376/- under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 for suppressing the facts with intent to evade payment of service tax. 4. I hereby impose a Penalty of Rs. 10,000/-under Section 77(1)(b) of the Finance Act, 1994 for not maintaining proper records relating to service tax. 5. I hereby impose penalty Rs.2,000 under section 70(1) of Finance Act 1994.' 2.1 Appellant is engaged in providing (i) Management, Maintenance or Repair Services (ii) Renting of Immovable Property Services and (iii) Cleaning Activity, which are taxable service in terms of Section 65 (64) read with 65(105)(zzg). Section 65(90a) read with 65(105)(zzzz) and Section 65 (24b) read with 65 (105) (zzzd) of the Finance Act 1994. They are registered with the department for payment of service tax in respect of services provided. 2.2 Acting on the information that the party was being legal owner of 'Riverside Mall' Vipin Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow were engaged in rendering Management, Maintenance or Repair Services, Renting of Immovable Proper....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the dispute. With regard to M/s Future, he stated that Future group have not provided them with any information regarding the outstanding s. tax dues till 30-09-2011 which stands at Rs 56,18,215/-. However, he stated that M/s Inox Leisure Ltd had deposited the entire service tax due till 30-092011 but Shri Katiyar didn't provide this office with the payment particulars in relation to the payment made by M/s Inox Leisure Ltd in accordance with the Hon'ble Supreme Court's direction in Civil Appeal No. 8390 of 2011. 2.7 After completion of the investigation from the ST-3 return filed for the period 2007-08 to 2011-12 following has been observed:- Financial year Management, maintenance or repair service Renting of immovable property Cleaning services Gross receipt Service tax paid In cash Through CENVAT Total S. Tax paid 2007-08 (Oct' 07- Mar'08) 0 5332584 0 5332584 3795 655313 659108 2008-09 0 22683084 0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ove, revenue authorities found that appellant have short paid service tax as follows:- F.Y. Gross income as per Balance sheet Rate of S. Tax (incl Ed cess & SHEd cess) S. Tax payable S. Tax paid (as per ST- 3) Short payment/ Excess payment (/+) (a) (d) (e) (f) (g) 2007-08 7429635 12.36% 9,18,303 6,59,108 -2,59,195 2008-09 ( April 08 to Feb. 09) 35744205 12.36% 44,17,984 21,06,839 -27,16,676 2008-09 (March 09) 3937192* 10.30% 4,05,531 2009-10 51118513 10.30% 52,65,207 14,07,594 -38,57,613 2010-11 55669816 10.30% 5733991 14,40,203 -4293788 2011-12 59012620 10.30% 6078300 0 -6078300 Total 212911981 22819316 5613744 -17205572 2.13 Accordingly, show....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... three times to a party during hearing of the appeal.' RULE 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982 provide as follows:- Action on appeal for appellant's default. - Where on the day fixed for the hearing of the appeal or on any other day to which such hearing may be adjourned, the appellant does not appear when the appeal is called on for hearing, the Tribunal may, in its discretion, either dismiss the appeal for default or hear and decide it on merits : Provided that where an appeal has been dismissed for default and the appellant appears afterwards and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his nonappearance when the appeal was called on for hearing, the Tribunal shall make an order setting aside the dismissal and restore the appeal.' Accordingly, this matter has been taken up for consideration on the basis of written submissions made by the Counsel for the appellant during the hearing on 28.11.2023 and after hearing Smt Chitra Srivastava, learned Authorized Representative appearing for the revenue. 3.2.1 In the written submission dated 28.11.2023 following has been submitted on behalf of the appellant:- • Demand ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....submitted the bond to the Central Excise department. • From the above, it is clear that the liability of service tax till 30th September 2011 is on the members of Retailers Association of India and in the present case Inox Leisure & Future Group has made the compliance by depositing 50% amount in cash & for the rest amount they had submitted the bond with the Central Excise department. • From the facts it is clear that the service tax due on rental income till 30th September 2011 has been deposited by our two tenants as per direction of the Supreme Court, demand of Service tax again from the Noticee is totally against the spirit of Supreme Court order and tantamount to Judicial indiscipline. Demand of Service tax from the Noticee which has already been deposited by the two tenants amounts to recovery of tax twice on same transaction which is not permissible under the law. • On the basis of above facts, and deposit particulars furnished by the Inox Leisure & Future Group duly acknowledged by the Central Excise department, demand of service tax amounting to Rs 88, 67,332/- is liable to be set aside on this ground alone. 3.3 Learned Authorized....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ws:- "The learned Additional Solicitor General prays for time to file counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents. Let the needful be done within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if necessary, may be filed within two weeks thereafter. Having regard to the issue and revenue involved, we expedite the hearing of the appeals. C.A. No. 8390/2011 M/s. Retailers Association of India v. Union of India & Ors. Having heard learned counsel for the parties on the question of stay with regard to the arrears of service tax due from the members of the appellant association prior to 30th September, 2011, we direct as follows : all members of the appellant association, namely, Retailers (i) Association of India, who are before us, shall deposit with the concerned department 50% of the arrears towards the said tax within six months in three equated instalments, on or before 1st November, 2011; 1st January 2012 and 1st March, 2012; (ii) for the balance 50% all the members shall furnish a solvent surety to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Commissioner; (iii) they shall file individual affidavits in this Court, within four weeks from today und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alance arrears of service tax, stayed in terms of this order, as may be directed by this Court at the time of final disposal of the appeals and (iv) the successful party in these appeals shall be entitled to interest on the amount stayed by this Court at such rate as may be directed at the time of final disposal of the appeals. It is clarified that this interim order shall apply only in the case of the appellants who shall file the requisite affidavits within the aforesaid period of four weeks from today. We further direct that any default in deposit of any one of the instalments by the dates fixed above, would result in vacation of this stay order and it will be open to the department to recover the balance amount in accordance with law.' 4.4 Appellant do not dispute the leviability of the service tax on the services under the category of renting of immovable property, but claimed that they have in case of tenants who are part of the Retailer Association of India not deposited the service tax as per the above order of Hon'ble Supreme Court as those tenants have not paid the service tax to them. They have also produced copy of the challans etc., showing the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ents before undersigned in support of the excess amount of CENVAT credit amounting to Rs.12,37,202/- availed by them. Therefore, I am of the view that in absence of genuine Cenvat Credit taking document, available with the party, the amount of Rs. 12,37,202/- is recoverable from them.' 4.7 On the above two issues the demand has been confirmed against the appellant, only for the reason that the appellant were not in position to substantiate their claim made in respect of the Miscellaneous income. 4.8 In respect of the miscellaneous income appellant had claimed that this income was on account of sale of scrap & interest, which is not taxable under Finance Act, 1994. However they were not able to substantiate their claim before the adjudicating authority. IN our view this claim, could have been very easily be substantiated by production of the profit and loss account by the appellant along with the note on accounts, which are essentially the part of the balance sheet. In absence of any such document, being produced at any stage we do not find any reason to agree with the said claim made and agree with the findings recorded by the adjudicating authority and uphold the confi....