9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heard both sides and perused record. 2. The appellant is a Commission Agent. The tax demand is in relation to booking of certain orders. The contention of the appellant was that there was no Service Tax during the period when the service was rendered and the tax being prospective, no demand could arise. It is not in dispute that the commission was received after the levy was imposed. 3.&ems ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ugned order and I find that the appellant has failed to provide copies of purchase orders procured by them, against which commission was received, details of supply made against the said purchase orders and details of payment realized or remitted by them. I also find that the debit notes were issued on 7-7-2004 and service tax on such commission was exempt up to 9-7-2004 and actual commission was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 73 of the Finance Act 1994 and invoking penal action under Sections 76, 77 & 78 of the Act ibid. I find that the demand confirmed and penalties imposed are justified. The case laws cited by the appellant are different from the facts and circumstances of the instant case, hence they are not applicable." 4. The finding is that the appellant failed to provide copies of purchase order proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... month of March 2005 and the assessee had not deposited the Service Tax on Commission received, which was liable to Service Tax w.e.f. 10-7-2004, under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service", therefore, the assessee were asked by the Jurisdictional Range Superintendent, Central Excise Range-II, Alwar, vide letter dated 20-6-2005 to deposit the Service Tax and also to submit complete details o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
