2006 (2) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -BR - Dated:- 20-2-2006 - Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. The appeal is directed against the demand of service tax of about Rs.24,000/- and imposition of equal penalty. The demand was raised by invoking the extended period provided under Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994. The demand is being challenged only on the ground of limitation. 3. The demand relates to service tax payable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he lower authority, Column 5 is meant for, "amount of service tax adjusted" and the appellant by declaring the receipts from the registered dealer under that Col., made mis-statements to the Revenue. 5. I have perused the records. The return in question has specific headings: Col.3 for value of taxable service rendered, Col.4 for amount of service 'tax payable and Col.7 (2) for service tax pai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... service tax paid) would have shown that the entries under Col.5 did not relate to adjustment at all, (because the amounts under that heading were always much higher than service tax payable) but to Registered Dealers, as mentioned by the appellant. Thus, there is merit in the appellant's contention that no mis-statement was being made. There was only a failure to discharge the tax liability correc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X