9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 5X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received as subscription - ST/139/2006 & CO 7/2006 - 372/2006-Cus.(PB) - Dated:- 10-10-2006 - [Order] -This appeal is directed against the order in appeal dated 12-5-2005 that set aside the partial demand and also set aside the penalty but upheld some part of the penalty as adjudged by the adjudicating authority 2. The Revenue is in appeal against the order. The relevant facts that arise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the respondent in support of his contention of lesser payment of service tax, allowed the appeal partially, confirmed the demand and also upheld the penalty 3. The learned DR submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) should not have accepted the balance sheet which was produced by the respondent before him as this point was not taken by the respondent before the adjudicating authority. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at in the statement of proprietor, it was mentioned that the respondent had received an amount of Rs. 8 lakhs which was totally not subscription and to confirm that, they had produced the certificate. 5. Considered the submissions made by both the sides. We find that the statement recorded of the Proprietor of respondents on 22-4-2003, reads as under:- On being asked, he stated that my firm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he whole year, and the Balance Sheet and Chartered Accountant certificate shows the same amount as subscription. Since the proprietor's statement has indicated that there was receipt of Rs. 3 lakhs as subscription, the respondent was free to adduce evidence to substantiate the figures, which he did so by producing balance sheet and Chartered Accountant's certificate. We do not agree to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
