2026 (5) TMI 1666

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gistered with the Service Tax Department but ST-3 Returns were not filed. On the basis of third party information received from the Income Tax Department for the Financial Year 2016-17, it appeared to the Department that the Appellant-Assessee had received an amount of Rs.5,41,35,186/- and this amount was also shown in the ITR which is more than the amount reflecting in Form 26AS statement under Section 194C (Rs.2,60,34,336/-). Accordingly, Show Cause Notice [SCN] dated 07.10.2021 was issued proposing to demand Service Tax amounting to Rs.81,20,278/- along with applicable interest and for imposition of penalties under various Sections. The Adjudicating Authority considered the submissions made by the Appellant-Assessee before him and droppe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The same is accordingly set aside." and the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in the matter of Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore vs. Motor World reported in 2012 (27) S.T.R. (Kar.) wherein, it has been held that:- Interpretation of statutes Penal provision They have to be strictly considered If two views are possible, view beneficial to assessee is to be preferred. and the maxim, "stare decisis et non quieta movere" which means to stand by decisions and not to disturb what is settled wherein the underlying logic of the doctrine is to maintain consistency and avoid uncertainty, penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 77(1)(c) and 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 is dropped....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....but in the present case of the Appellant, amount to the tune of Rs.6,02,679/- as shown in last para at page 6-7 of the impugned Order-In-Appeal and amount to the tune of Rs.5,29,232/- which was received by the Appellant as their service portion for installation of water cooler and water purifier as stated in para 27 of the impugned Order-In-Original [which is the abated assessable value of the consideration, as shown in para 27 of the impugned Order-In-Original], hence the amount of Rs.78,610/- is the part of the amount of Rs.6,02,679/- and amount to the tune of Rs.69,030/- is the part of amount of Rs.5,29,232/-, as shown in the bills & was collected only for providing the works contract service/ installation of water cooler and water purif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....id of any merits, may be dismissed. 8. Heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 9. I find that the SCN dated 07.10.2021 has been issued for the Financial Year 2016-17 on the basis of third party data received from the Income Tax Department. The normal period for issuance of the SCN expired on 25.10.2019. Hence, the SCN has been issued much beyond the normal period of limitation. 10. I find that the whole case of demand has been built up merely on the basis of figures shown in the ITR and the financial statements. The Department has not made any enquiry to ascertain the reason of difference between the figures shown in the Profit & Loss Account and Balance Sheets. I find that the demand raised by invoking the longer peri....