2017 (1) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. ORDER The above appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the confirmation of demand under Section 75 and imposition of penalty under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.  2.  Brief facts are that during the course of verification of the accounts for the period from 07/2009 to 01/2011, it was found that the appellants had received mobilization advances.&nbs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es the penalties imposed under the Section 77.  The appellants filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the same.  Hence this appeal.  3.  On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Counsel Sh. G. Natrajan submitted that the appellants are not liable to pay interest from the date of receiving the advances for the reason that the said amount is only mobilization advan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bilities.    4.  On behalf of the department the Ld. AR, Shri. P.S. Reddy reiterated the findings in the impugned order.  He submitted that the appellants have received the amounts and are consideration for the services provided and therefore are liable to pay the service tax, and interest thereon and also penalties.         5.  I have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X