2014 (1) TMI 670

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... low a wrong practice inspite of earlier show cause notice issued to them - Following decision of M/s Robot Detective & Security Agency vs CCE., Chennai 2008 (12) TMI 141 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] - Decided against assessee.
Mr. H.K. Thakur, J. For the Appellant : Shri R R Dave (Adv.) For the Respondent : Shri J Nair (AR) JUDGEMENT Per : Mr. H.K. Thakur; This appeal has been filed by the appellant against OIA No. 60/2009(STC)/LMR/Commr(A)/Ahd dt 27.2.2009/5.3.2009. Facts of the case are that appellant is engaged in providing services of Security Agency and holds a Service Tax Registration. During a scrutiny of the records maintained by the appellant for the period 2002-03 to 2004-05, it was found that there was a difference in the amounts r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... & CCE, Ahmedabad III vs M/s Akshar Chem (I) Ltd., [2013 2(292) ELT 550 (Tri. -Ahmd)]. 3. Shri J Nair (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that in view of CESTAT Bangalore's Order in the case of CCE, Calicut vs M/s Steel Industries [2005(188)elt(33)(Tri.-Bang.)] theory of universal knowledge, in case of balance sheet filed with Registrar of Companies under the Companies Act, will not make the demand time barred. Regarding invoking of extended period in the second show cause notice, he relied upon the judgment of Madras CESTAT in the case of M/s Robot Detective & Security Agency vs CCE, Chennai [2009-TIOL-238-CESTAT-MAD]. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The case was agitated by the appellant only on the issue th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ity to the assessees of being heard in their defence. 4.1 In view of the above position of law appellants argument, that demand is time barred, as balance sheets were regularly filed with Registrar of Companies is required to be rejected and detailed findings of Commr (A) in Paras - 7 & 8 of his OIA dtd 27.2.09/05.03.09 are required to be upheld. 5. On the issue of invocable of extended period in the second show cause notice, it may be mentioned that limitation issue is a mixed question of facts and law. This appeal has to be seen from the facts of with the present case. Once on an issue a show cause notice was issued to the appellant than it was also appellants duty to inform the Revenue that inspite of earlier show cause notice appell .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X