TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 593
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce Tax (Adjudication), Bangalore. Appellant has also filed a miscellaneous application for admission of additional grounds. After allowing the miscellaneous application, with the consent of both sides, appeal is taken up for hearing and disposal. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on the basis of intelligence, investigation was initiated by the DGCEI, Bangalore against the appellant which revealed that the appellant had entered into an MOU with M/s. Sobha Developers Pvt. Ltd. along with one Shri Lakshman on 24.05.2006 and received a consideration of Rs.5,62,10,520/- during the period 14.10.2006 to 12.04.2008 but failed to discharge service tax even though the services rendered by the appellant fall under the category of Rea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d facts of the case, the learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that M/s. Sobha Developers Pvt. Ltd. vide letter dated 16.08.2010 intimated the DGCEI that they have made payments to the appellant between 14.10.2006 to 12.04.2008 pursuant to an MOU signed on 24.05.2006. He has submitted that the appellant is an individual and engaged in various social welfare activities. He is the founder trustee of several charitable trusts which include educational institutions. The appellant at no point of time in his career engaged in the business of providing services of a Real Estate Agency service or that of a Real Estate Consultant as defined under Section 65(88) and 65(89) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant, however, in one solitary t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Agent service; accordingly service tax was not paid on the amount received from M/s. Sobha Developers Ltd. He has submitted that there is sufficient and reasonable cause for not discharging the service tax in time and hence, it is a fit case to drop the penal provisions invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. In support, he has referred to the following judgments:- i. CST Vs. Motor World & ors [(2012) 79 DTR 151 KAR] ii. Faithful Security Services Vs. CCE [(2010) 33 VST 292 (CESTAT-Chennai)] iii. Akbar Travels of India (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE [(2008) 17 VST 40 (CESTAT-Bangalore)] iv. Advertising Services (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE [(2006) 5 STT 158 (Bang.-CESTAT)] v. CCE Vs. Machino Montell (I) Ltd. [2004(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reement between M/s. Sobha Developers Ltd. and Shri Jayagopala Gowda / Chandrashekara Gowda. Also, it is not in dispute that while making payment, M/s. Sobha Developers Ltd. had deducted the TDS and also the appellant had reflected the amount so received in their IT returns. The claim of the appellant is that this is a solitary transaction which they did throughout the entire career and they had not at any time provided Real Estate Agency service and also not rebutted by placing evidence by the Revenue. Also it is a fact which has been recorded by the Commissioner soon after a communication sent to the appellant about the receipt of the amount from M/s. Sobha Developers Ltd. by DGCEI, the appellant had paid a total amount of Rs.77,72,805/- ....