2014 (8) TMI 855

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the appellants. 2. The appellants filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 18/CE/MRT-I/2009 dated 27.2.2009 which upheld the Order-in-Original No. 03/2008 (ST-2/2007) dated 31.3.2008 confirming the service tax demand of Rs. 3,59,040/- along with interest and penalties. 3. The facts, briefly stated, are as under :-             The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d not disclose this vital fact, they were guilty of wilful mis-statement/suppression with intention to evade service tax and thereby invoked the extended period. The appellate authority vide the impugned order upheld the order-in-original. 4. No one appeared on behalf of the appellants but the ld. A.R. conceded that the reverse charge mechanism was without any legal basis prior to 18.4.2006. 5. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X