9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e services of manpower recruitment and supply agency, maintenance and repairs of the building and cleaning services to National Mineral Development Corporation, in terms of their contract with them with NMDC. They had started providing the service sometime in 2005 and had applied for and obtained the service tax registration in that year. However, they did not pay any service tax even though they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty on them under Section 76, 77 and 78. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Jurisdictional Additional Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 25/3/10 by which the service tax demand as made in the show cause notice was confirmed alongwith interest and beside this, penalty of Rs. 200/- per day under Section 76, penalty of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 77 for non-filing of ST-3 return a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issuing any bills, that the appellant had no control over the amount to be received by them, which was being determined by NMDC, that since the contract did not provide for reimbursement of service tax and NMDC were not paying any amount towards service tax, the appellant were under impression that no service tax is payable, and that bonafide of the appellant is evident from the fact that they ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from both the sides and perused the records. 4. The appellant do not dispute their service tax liability. Since during the period of dispute the ST-3 returns had not been filed, penalty under Section 77 would be attracted and, hence, the same has been correctly upheld. As regards penalty under Section 78, I find that though the appellant had taken service tax registration in 2005, and subsequentl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
