2018 (2) TMI 482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pute with reference to liability of the appellant to pay service tax of ₹ 75,52,727/- which, in fact, they have collected from the customers, we find no reason to interfere with the findings of the original authority - demand upheld. Liability of service tax - reimbursement charges collected by the appellant - Held that: - it is well settled legal position that reimbursable expenditure on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... #8377; 75,52,727/- for the period April 2007 to February 2008 and further amount of ₹ 2,75,561/- for the period April 2004 to February 2008. Penalty of ₹ 80 lakhs was imposed on the appellant. The first amount of confirmation is towards service tax collected by the appellant and not paid to the Government. The second amount is towards service tax payable on reimbursement charges collec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dt.4.8.2017 informed that there is a proceeding in the Hon'ble High Court of Madras resulting in the appointment of Official Liquidator. However, when the case was listed subsequent to that date, none appeared for the appellant. Considering that the main facts of the case are not in dispute with reference to liability of the appellant to pay service tax of ₹ 75,52,727/- which, in fact, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X