9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 619X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fide belief that service tax was not payable on legal service, the appellant did not pay the service tax amount into the Central Government account. However, on pointing out the mistake by the audit wing, the service tax amount towards such taxable service was paid before issuance of the show-cause notice. With regard to mismatch in the figure of taxable value reflected in the periodic return vis- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GST & Central Excise, Nagpur. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is registered with the Service Tax Department for providing various taxable services defined under the Finance Act, 1994. During the course of audit of records maintained by the appellant for the disputed period, the officers of Service Tax Department observed that the appellant did not pay the service tax on legal s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act on the appellant. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 04.01.2018 has upheld the adjudged demand confirmed on the appellant. 3. The Ld. Consultant appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant is not contesting the service tax along with interest demand confirmed against it. However, he submits that the appellant had never indulged into any fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting out the mistake by the audit wing, the service tax amount towards such taxable service was paid before issuance of the show-cause notice. I also find that there were divergent views by the judicial forums with regard to levy of service tax on such taxable service. Further, the Department has not brought on any evidence to show that non-payment of tax by the appellant was owing to the reason o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause proceedings. It is an undisputed fact that the Department has not brought on any tangible evidence to prove involvement of the appellant in fraudulent activities. Therefore, I am of the view that penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Act cannot be sustained. 7. In view of above, I do not find any merits in the impugned order, so far as it imposed penalty on the appellant. Accordingly, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
