9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 92X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ismissed by the Appellate Tribunal as a consequent of a default in deposit of the amount directed by the Tribunal by the order dated 17 September 2013, it is considered appropriate, in the facts and circumstances of the case, that in the event the appellant now deposits half of the amount indicated by the Appellate Tribunal in its order dated 17 September 2013 within a period of eight weeks - Conditional stay granted. - Central Excise Appeal No. - 70 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 11-4-2014 - Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud,CJ And Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,JJ. For the Appellant : A. P. Mathur For the Respondent : B. K. S. Raghuvanshi ORDER The present appeal which has been filed by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Ballia under Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not been submitted. The Adjudicating Officer passed the following order on 14 February 2008: 1. I confirm the demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs.1,14,77,883/- (Rupee One crore fourteen lacs seventy seven thousand eight hundred eighty three only) to be recovered under section 73 of the Act in accordance with the provisions of Section 68 of the Act along with interest due as provided in Section 75 of the Act from M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Ballia. 2. I order to appropriate the amount of Rs.5,57,820/- (Rupees five lacs fifty seven thousand eight hundred twenty only) paid under protest by the party in this regard. 3. I impose a penalty of Rs.200/- for every day delay upto 18.4.06 thereafter 2% per month of the Service Tax amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e short collection of service tax against the amount actually recovered resulting in short services of service tax. Later, in the order, the adjudicating authority also noted that the petitioner made short collection from January, 2002 to December, 2006 to the extent confirmed. From the adjudication order, we not able to infer with any degree of certitude that amounts not received were also included the received value of services provided. In the summary of the adjudication order, the authority records that if no revenue was collected, the assessee did not disclose the same in its chart and hence there is no question of outstanding amounts of service tax not received from defaulter subscribers. The adjudicating authority also records that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though ST-III returns had not been submitted by the appellant but still there was no willful suppression of facts as the appellant had submitted the entire relevant facts and had deposited the service tax received from the customers. This plea was not accepted by the Commissioner, Central Excise who on an analysis recorded in the adjudication order that the demand of service tax for the period from April 2002 to December 2006 amounting to Rs.1,14,77,883/- had been arrived at on the basis of the documents submitted by the assessee relating to collection of revenue and the deposit of Service Tax. The Appellate Tribunal, while considering the application for waiver of pre-deposit, h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
