2026 (5) TMI 4

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ition of penalty and late fees for non-filing of returns. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the activity of clearing and forwarding agency services and renting of immovable property services. The appellant obtained registration on 01.12.2015 but did not file their ST-3 returns regularly. During the period December 2016-17, the appellant received various input services from input service providers and availed CENVAT credit thereon. Thereafter, the appellant did not provide any service till December 2016, but in January 2017 the appellant started providing taxable services to their clients, and for that activity the appellant was liable to file their Service Tax return for the period October 2016 to March 2017. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-filing of ST-3 returns and equivalent penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant is before me. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant is a bonafide service provider and had no knowledge that after registration, if they do not provide services, they are required to file ST-3 returns. It is the contention of the learned counsel that they started their activity during December 2016 and first taxable services were provided in January 2017. They availed CENVAT credit immediately, which was utilised for payment of service tax for the period October 2016 to March 2017, and they paid Service Tax of Rs.78,918 on 31.03.2017. However, when the appell....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntention of the appellant and submitted that it is a case where the appellant was required to file ST-3 returns in time but failed to do so. The appellant never filed ST-3 returns even after knowing that their Service Tax registration had been suo moto cancelled in April 2017. The appellant did not take any steps for restoration of registration or filing of returns, therefore, it is a case of suppression of facts and the proceedings have rightly been initiated. It is further submitted that the appellant has availed CENVAT credit after 365 days from the date of issue of invoices and were not maintaining proper books of accounts during the impugned period. 7. I have heard the parties and considered the submissions. 8. After hearing the ....