9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 868X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In such circumstances, as provided under Section 44AB of Income Tax Act, the Books of Account were subject to tax audit and accordingly, it appears that the appellant was receiving the service of professionals like C.A. understanding tax obligations. But, there is no finding of any contumacious conduct on part of the appellant. - appellant is entitled to benefit under Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 and it appears that the show-cause notice was issued without proper consideration of the facts on record. In this view of the mater, penalty as reduced by the first appellate authority is dropped and set aside and the appellant will be entitled to refund or adjustment of the excess tax paid, which shall be calculated and granted by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hines, M/s Maharashtra Engineers and M/s Maharashtra Enterprises, etc. Further, demand of ₹ 13,46,239/- was proposed under the Works Contract Service in respect of which the appellant had already deposited the Service Tax amount of ₹ 8,97,867/-. Further ₹ 1728/- was demanded towards Goods Transport Agency - input services. The appellant contested the show-cause notice by filing detail reply and leading evidence. Vide Order-in-Original, the proposed demand was confirmed and all the tax amounts were appropriated save and except the disputed amount under Works Contract Service. Penalty was also imposed under Section 70, 77(1)(a) 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2.1 Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngly, entitled to the benefit under Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1944, which provides that on being so pointed out by the Revenue authority, where the assessee deposited the Service Tax + interest and does not dispute its liability, no further show-cause notice is required to be issued. Accordingly prays for allowing the appeal. 4. Learned AR relies on the impugned order. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that it is a facts on record that other than admitted liability, amount proposed to be demanded and confirmed from the appellant have been dropped by the first appellate authority. Thus, the contention of the appellant stands fortified and there is no finding either in the Order-in-Original or in the Order-in-Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
