9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 958X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hority was correct in denying the CENVAT credit - penalty rightly imposed under the provisions of Section 78 of the FA, 1994 as appellant is not able to convince us that there a bonafide belief in non/short payment of government dues - demand upheld - appeal dismissed - decided against assessee. - ST/240/12 - A/86735/17/STB - Dated:- 7-4-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... U). A show-cause cum demand notice was issued. Appellant contested the notice on merits and submitted that they have discharged the service tax demands by debiting in Cenvat account, that tax is not payable as also amounts received from construction of roads, pipeline laid for drinking water from Pawna Dam and that they being sub-contractor, tax is not payable as the main contractor has discharged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities. 6. We find that issue involved and agitated before us is only regarding the eligibility to avail CENVAT credit and discharge of the tax by availing such credit and penalties. As regards the CENVAT credit we find the adjudicating authority has recorded the following findings:- 25. The notice while calculating the service tax payable by them had claimed CENVAT credit of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re of these credits except the statement that they are adjusting these credits. It is also observed that the notice has claimed exemption towards the site preparation work in the course of construction of road done for M/s. B.G. Shirke. They also claimed exemption in the construction of pipe line for M/s. SMC Indu (JV). In the said situation while claiming the exemption and under the circumstances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty was correct in denying the CENVAT credit accordingly in our considered view, hereinabove reproduced findings do not require any interference. 6.2 As regards penalty on the appellant we find that the adjudicating authority has correctly invoked the provisions of Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 as appellant is not able to convince us that there a bonafide belief in non/short payment of g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
