2017 (8) TMI 470

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... "Manpower Recruitment & Supply Agency". Department noticed that the appellant had not paid the service tax though collected for the period from 01.01.2010 to 31.03.2011 under the category 'Construction Services in respect of Commercial Buildings & Civil Structures.' Hence, a show-cause notice was issued to the appellant and vide the impugned Order-in-Original, the lower adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of service tax of Rs. 18,57,069/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Fifty Seven Thousand and Sixty Nine only) with interest. He appropriated the amount of Rs. 18,57,075/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Fifty Seven Thousand and Seventy Five only) paid by the appellant towards service tax confirmed and Rs. 1,08,506/- (Rupees One Lakh Eight Thousan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o only) which was paid with interest. He further submitted that the appellant collected only Rs. 2,31,545/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Thirty One Thousand Five Hundred and Forty Five only) against an amount of Rs. 4,23,135/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Twenty Three Thousand One Hundred and Thirty Five only) in respect of Rs. 18,60,099/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Sixty Thousand and Ninety Nine only) service rendered to M/s. Tech Sharp Engineers (P) Ltd., Chennai no service tax was collected. He has also stated that though service tax was collected in respect of M/s. MRPL, but the same was not paid to the Government due to financial difficulty since the amount due from M/s. Tech Sharp Engineers (P) Ltd. was not received in time. He also submitted that the service .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Vs. CC, Surat-II 2013 (30) S.T.R. 306 (Tri. -Ahmd.) g) M/s. Doshion Ltd CCE, Ahmedabad 2012-TIOL-1716-CESTA T-AHM. h) IWI Crogenic Vaporization System India Vs. CCE, Cuss and ST, Vadodara-ll 2015-TIOL-1458-CESTAT-AHM 5. On the other had the learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the following decisions and submitted that a lenient view should be taken as far as penalty under Section 80 is concerned as there was a reasonable ground for the assessee not to pay the service tax in time. a) Omega Services and Consultants (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Cochin [2011] 46 VST 100 (CESTAT-BANG.) b) CST, Bangalore Vs. C Ahead Info Technologies India Private Limited 2012 (74) Kar. L.J. 90 (HC) (DB) c) CST, Bangalore Vs. Aravind Fashions Limited 2012 ( .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X