9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Held that:- Primary adjudicating authority relied upon the data provided by the appellants itself to arrive at the amount of service tax short paid. The appellant has not been able to show as to how those calculations are not correct. It has not been able to provide any reconciliation statement to establish that the figures made available by them earlier had factual errors. The appellant had not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 008 in terms of which service tax demand of ₹ 1,14,77,883/- for the period Jan. 2002 to Dec. 2006 was confirmed along with interest. Penalties under Sections 76 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 were also imposed. 2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as under: While examining the records of the appellant for the period Jan. 2002 to Dec. 2006, it was found that the appellant had no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the figures and taxable value as provided by the appellant (Ann-B of Show Cause Notice) and figures of service tax payment reported by the office of CGM, Lucknow were relied upon to quantify the amount of impugned service tax short collected/short paid. Thus the total amount of service tax short paid during April 2002 to December 2006 worked out to ₹ 1,14,77,883/- which was confirmed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rectly paid. 4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. We find that the primary adjudicating authority relied upon the data provided by the appellants itself to arrive at the amount of service tax short paid. The appellant has not been able to show as to how those calculations are not correct. It has not been able to provide any reconciliation statement to establish that the figures ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
