9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lty under Section 78, appellant had taken service tax registration in 2005, and subsequently they were regularly receiving payment from NMDC for the services provided, neither any service tax paid nor any returned was filed. Provisions of Section 78 are attracted. Appeal dismissed. - ST Appeal No. 1738 of 2010 (SM) - 849/2011 - Dated:- 17-11-2011 - Shri Rakesh Kumar, J. For Appellant: H V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Proprietor of the appellant firm who admitted that though they had provided the taxable service to NMDC and had also received payment from them, no service tax had been paid. He also accepted his service tax liability and agreed to pay service tax alongwith interest. His service tax liability was determined as Rs. 5 ,16,821 /-. A show cause notice dated 3/2/09, therefore, was issued to the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 2. Heard both the sides. 2.1 Shri H.V. Ghirikar , Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant pleaded that the appellant is a very small service provider, that in terms of the appellant's contract with NMDC they were providing the services of manpower recruitment and supply agency, maintenance and repairs of the building and cleaning, that as per the practice it is the NMDC, who on the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R. Jagdev , the learned Senior Departmental Representative defended the impugned order and emphasized that the fact that the appellant had taken service tax registration in 2005 shows that they were aware of their service tax liability, but in spite of this, the appellant neither filed any ST-3 return not paid any service tax, and that the conduct of the appellant does not show their bonafide and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed the amount received by them for taxable services provided by filing ST-3 return. From the totality of the circumstances in this case, I am of the view that the provisions of Section 78 are attracted and, hence. I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order upholding the penalty under Section 78. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. (Dictated and pronounced in open court.) - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
