9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t OIA No. PJ/126/VDR-II/2013-14 dated 27/5/2013 under which the first appellate authority has upheld the OIO dated 27/3/2012 passed by the adjudicating authority. An amount of Rs 10,14,937/- alongwith interest, was confirmed by the adjudicating authority with respect to Business Auxiliary Service provided by the appellant. The amounts already paid by the appellant were appropriated and penalties u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervice provided were received through cheque and duly reflected in the books of accounts maintained by the appellant. That as soon as the short payment was brought to the knowledge the same was paid when documents relating to M/s Ratnamani Metals and Tubes Ltd were brought to their notice. It was his case that the statements of the appellant were recorded regarding providing of Business Auxiliary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and 5 of OIO dated 27/3/2012 passed by the adjudicating authority and strongly argued that since service tax under Business Auxiliary Services provided by the appellant was recovered during the period November 2008 to March 2009 a Nil ST-3 return was filed with the Revenue. It was his case that no reasonable cause has been shown by the appellant as to what prevented the appellant from discharging ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd several summons were also issued to the appellant for submitting complete details of the Business Auxiliary Service provided to M/s Ratnamani Metals and Tubes Ltd during the year 2008-09. Only on receipt of such letter, the appellant started discharging their service tax liabilities under Business Auxiliary Service in the month of July 2010 through GAR-7 challans. It is also evident from the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
