AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 255
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....21 dated 26.03.2021] imposing penalty under Section 78A of the Finance Act, 1994 [Act, 1994]. 2. The appellant, Shri Anurag Mundra, who has been working as Joint Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer and Shri Viklap Mundra working as Joint Managing Director of M/s. Ujaas Energy Ltd. [UEL], which is engaged in providing 'Works Contract Service' for engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning of solar power plants. UEL was under Corporate Insolvency Project vide NCLT order dated 17.09.2020, which has now resulted in Final Resolution Plan dated 13.10.2023. 3. As per Audit Memo dated 27.11.2017, the demand was sought to be made against UEL for a sum of Rs.40,54,73,782/- for the period from FY 2014-2015 to FY 2016-17, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion-III, Indore. The letter dated 23.10.2023 by the Company Secretary stated that as per the approved Resolution Plan Rs.9,72,799/- has been approved towards the Government dues and out of which, the share towards the CGST and Central Excise was 98.26%. 7. To consider the arguments raised by the Counsel, I find it necessary to record the relevant contents of the SCN and the impugned order as under:- SCN dated 16.10.2019 "6.2 Shri. Anurag Mundra as Chief Financial Officer & Joint Managing Director, M/s Ujaas Energy Limited, the 'Noticee no. 02' has been directly controlling the day to day activities and overall affairs of all the company. He was instrumental and directly responsible for short payment of service tax and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s have been done at his behest in the records and accounts of Noticee no.01 as elaborated in this notice. All the day to day affairs/activities were also being reported to the 'Noticee no.03'. Shri. Vikalp Mundra also is to be the key person, responsible and accountable for applying the said modus operandi of the case (major share of service value is loaded on value of goods) and for the intentional and willful acts of omissions & commissions described in this notice with evidential value, and for his active involvement in dealing directly with the contractors and buyers/service recipients for undervaluation of service rendered by Noticee no.01, which he also knew or had reason to believe were liable for penalty under the Law and al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ector of M/s Ujaas Energy Limited. I find that these two Joint Managing Directors were directly controlling the day to day activities and overall affairs of the company and therefore they were instrumental and directly responsible for short payment of service tax. I find that these two persons working at the helm of affairs of the company were the key person, responsible and accountable for applying the above modus operandi in the matter i.e. they manipulated the records in such a way that major share of service value is loaded on value of goods. I find that both these persons were actively involved in dealing with the contractors and buyers/service recipients for planning in undervaluation of services rendered by their company, wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uently, set aside. 10. In M/s. Priya Chhatwal, learned Single Member on perusal of the impugned order therein observed that no case has been made against the appellant to have been actively involved in running of the business and, there is no specific record against the appellant, held that no penalty under Section 78A can be imposed. It was observed that penalty under Section 78A can be imposed only on a person, who at the time of such contravention was in charge and was responsible to the company for the conduct of business of such company and was knowingly concerned with such contravention. The learned Single Member had relied on the earlier decision in the case of Smt. Manjeet Kaur Bansal, where the penalty under Section 78A was held....