TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 761
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....med the demand of service tax as proposed in the show cause notice dated 11.09.2019 along with equal penalty under Section 78 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994; the learned commissioner has also imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000 under Section 77 of the Act. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant was engaged in mining of stone along with associated minor minerals and sale thereof; pursuant to an auction held in July, 2015, the mine was granted on lease to the appellant on 24.07.2015 and subsequently, the appellant entered into a Lease Deed on 26.10.2015 with the Director General, Mines & Zoology in terms of the provisions of Deed. The appellant was required to pay an amount of Rs.25,54,50,000/- in instalments. The Departme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estigation, the summons were issued on 24.08.2018 and the appellant vide their letter dated 10.09.2014 contended that they have been granted the mining lease on 24.07.2015 and they have been paying VAT/GST on the value of the builders extracting from the mines and sold to the customers. The appellant relied upon the decision of India Cement Limited and contended that payment of royalty is amounting to payment of tax and no service tax on the said tax is impossable and hence, they are not liable for making payment of any service tax. The appellant had submitted the copy of the contract, letters of Intent awarded by Mines and Zoology Department, Haryana, copy of the Income Tax, Balance Sheet for the Financial Year 2016-17 and Form 26AS and de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellant has not been heard and therefore the appellant could not bring his defense on record. He further submits that the appellant's contention as contained in their letter dated 10.09.2018 in response to summons has not been considered. He further submits that during the relevant time, the issue involved was contentious as to whether payment of royalty is amounting to tax and payment of service tax would be amounting to levying tax on tax. He also submits that the levy of tax on the services provided by the Government to the business entities came into force w.e.f. 01.04.2016 and the appellant was not a person liable to pay service tax under Section 68(2) and/or under Notification No. 30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. 4.1 He further submits ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Authorized Representative for the department reiterated the findings of the impugned order and submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) has passed a detailed order after considering his statement made during the course of investigation and also the documents produced by him. He further submits that in spite of various opportunities given to the appellant he did not appear for the personal hearing and also did not file reply to the show cause notice and therefore, the Commissioner had no option but to pass the order on the basis of the documentary evidence available on record. 6. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material on record, we find that the impugned order has been passed without giving reaso....