9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial or cleaning factory premises, by no stretch of imagination, can be considered as job work, so as to be eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 08/2005-ST. Therefore, the appellant's submission in this regard lacks merit. The appellant has also not pleaded any financial hardship in the appeal memorandum. Waiver of pre deposit - Held that:- Appellant has not made out any case for grant of any stay - appellant to make a pre-deposit of entire amount of service tax confirmed - On such compliance, pre-deposit of balance of dues adjudged against the appellant shall stand waived and recovery, thereof stayed during the pendency of the appeal. - ST/86734/13 - Stay Order No. S/1001/2013-WZB/C-I(CSTB) and Misc. Order No. 1069/2013-WZB/C-I( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liability pending to be discharged by the appellant amounted to Rs. 53,10,390/- as per the books of accounts and records maintained by the appellant. 3.1 A statement of the appellant was recorded on 03/08/2010 wherein the appellant admitted non-discharge of service tax liability. The same was attributed to non-receipt of service tax from some of the customers. The appellant also stated that they had given a cash of Rs. 20 lakhs to Mr. Joshi (M/s. Joshi Associate) the Tax Consultant for payment of service tax. However, the said Shri. Deepak Joshi denied having received any payment of Rs. 20 lakhs from the appellant. 3.2 On completion of investigation, a show-cause notice dated 28/06/2011 was issued to the appellant demanding service tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the principles of natural justice inasmuch as their contentions raised in the reply to the show-cause notice vide fax dated 11/09/2012 has not been considered. It is also claimed that the appellant is exempted from service tax vide Notification NO. 8/2005-ST. It is further alleged that opportunity to cross examine Mr. Joshi has not been provided. In view of the above, it is contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and accordingly stay be granted. 5. The Ld. AR appearing for the Revenue on the other hand contends that the appellant has been given enough opportunities to defend their case. However, they did not avail of these opportunities and therefore, it cannot be held that principles of natural justice have been viol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs to discharge the service tax liability. The said consultant has denied receipt of Rs. 20 lakhs. The service tax demand has been made on the basis of the figures given in the books of accounts maintained by the appellant and invoices issued by them to their clients and therefore, there is sound basis for computation of such demand. As regards the claim of the appellant that they are eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 08/2005-ST, as per appellant's own version the activity undertaken by them involved shifting of raw materials and housekeeping activities. Notification No. 08/2005-ST grants exemption on job work carried out by service provider on the materials supplied by the clients. Such job work envisage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
