9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant, SBI, a Government of India undertaking is rendering "Banking and Financial Services". Show Cause Notice dated 19.10.2009 alleged short levy of Rs. 3,06,177/- for the period from 10.09.04 to March, 2008 and proposed recovery thereof along with interest and proposed imposition of penalties. The original authority confirmed the demand as proposed in the show cause notice along with intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have mistakenly treated the income including the service tax paid as value of taxable service and paid excess service tax in respect of years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2007-08. However, only during the year 2006-07 there was a short payment due to calculation mistakes. Even though the demand was time barred, they have chosen to pay the entire service tax involved for the period 2006-07. They have also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . According to him, it is not a fit case for invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act. He also submits that there is a penalty sustained under Section 77 by the Commissioner (Appeals), though the same was reduced from Rs. 5000/- to Rs.1000/-. This penalty was not challenged by the appellants. This implies that the appellants have given incorrect particulars/wrong statements before the statutory auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for invoking Section 78 of the Finance Act implying that there was no intention to evade service tax. Under these circumstances, the submission of the Ld. Advocate, on behalf of the appellants that the demand was time barred and that they have paid time barred demand of the service tax merits to be noted. The department is not in appeal challenging waiver of penalty under Section 78 of the Financ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
