2026 (8) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n providing taxable services, namely, supply of supply of tangible goods, GTA, Construction Services, business auxiliary service, outdoor catering and works contract services. The appellant was paying service tax by availing CENVAT credit on inputs and input services and cable goods. An audit was conducted and a show cause notice dated 30.12.2020 was issued from the period 2015-16 alleging short payment of service tax in respect of supply of tangible goods, renting of immovable property and business auxiliary services. On the basis of difference found on comparison of balance sheet and ST-3 return filed for the impugned period. By way of impugned order the demands proposed in show cause notice were confirmed along with interest and penaltie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....red to their ST-3 returns. As there is difference in the figures,therefore, demand has rightly been confirmed on the appellant. With regard to extended period of limitation, he relied on the decision of Varsi Buildcom vs. Principal Commissioner, Indore vide Final Order No. 54537 of 2024 dated 06.03.2024. He also relied on the decision of Hakim Singh Cntractor vs. Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Alwar vide Final Order No. 51645 of 2023 dated 16.11.2023. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 6. The main contention of the appellant is that as on the identical issue an earlier show cause notice was issued to the appellant for short payment of service tax for the period 2005-06 to 2009-10 on 21.102.2010 and this show c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iled can be issued within the normal period of one year provided under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act. If the officer fails to complete the scrutiny and raise a demand within the period and the demand gets barred by limitation, the responsibility for that rests squarely on the officer who failed in his duty. 8. Neither the fact that the assessee is operating the self- assessment procedure nor that it had failed to assess the tax liability etc. correctly means that the assessee had committed a fraud or colluded or willfully mis-stated or suppressed any fact or violated any provisions of the Act or Rules with an intent to evade. If any of these factors are alleged they should be established in the SCN and in the order. 9. ....