2025 (6) TMI 2136

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssion & findings, I hereby partially allow the present appeal No. 161-ST/APPLMRT/GZB/2022-23 dated 27.01.2023 filed by M/s Rudra Services, No.2, Indo Bulgar Foods Compound, Delhi Meerut Road, Ghaziabad-201001 and the Order-in-Original No. 31/AC/CGST/GZB-II/22-23 dated 24.11.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central GST, Division-II, Ghaziabad is modified to the effect that the confirmed amount of Service tax is reduced to Rs. 28,852/- along with applicable interest. The penalty amount under Section 78 of the Act is also reduced to Rs. 28,852/-.The penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under section 77(1) is set-aside & penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under section 77(2) of the Act imposed vide the impugned order is upheld." 2.1 The Appellant was regi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ressing the facts and value of taxable service with intent to evade payment of service tax. (iv) Penalty should not be imposed upon the party for non filing of ST-3 returns under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 142 and Section 174 of the CGST Act, 2017. (v) Penalty should not be imposed upon them under Section 77(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 142, Section 173 and Section 174 of the CGST Act, 2017 for not maintaining the proper records, not to appear before the Central Excise Officer in pursuance of summon and not to pay tax electronically. 2.4 The Show Cause Notice was adjudicated as per Order-In-Original dated 24.11.2022 holding as follows:- ORDER i. I confirm the de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ction 142(8) and Section 174 of the CGST Act, 2017. 2.5 Aggrieved Appellant has filed the appeal before the Commissioner Appeals who has modified the Order-In-Original by the impugned order as indicated in Para 1 above. 2.6 Aggrieved Appellant is before the Tribunal. 3.1 None appeared for the Appellant. Have considered the matter on the basis of the records and after hearing Shri Santosh Kumar, learned Authorized Representative appearing on behalf of the Revenue. 4.1 I have considered the impugned order alongwith the submissions made in the appeal and during the course of argument. 4.2 It is observed that while the impugned order allowed the benefit of tax deposited by the Appellant against the challans and without giving any cr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....- total Rs. 1,94,647/- as evident from the deposited challans of service tax for the second half of the financial year 2016-17, as submitted by the Appellant. 9. I observe that the Appellant has paid service tax liability of Rs. 1,94,647/- against the total demand of service tax of Rs. 2,23,499/- for the financial year 2016-17. I find that the Appellant is liable to pay differential amount of service tax of Rs. 28,852/- along with applicable interest and equal penalty under section 78." 4.3 Appellant has raised a specific ground in appeal stating as follows:- "4. Because order of commissioner of appeal erred in sustaining the demand of service tax of Rs. 28852/- because appellant has already paid due service tax through....