9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1675X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the Service Tax Act, there is no positive evidence on record to indicate that such non-following of the tax regime by the appellant was with any malafide intention. The appellant was only a commission agent and there could be a bonafide belief on his part that such earning of commission would not amount to providing any taxable services. In the absence of any positive evidence to the con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n providing commission agent services to M/s Samsonite South Asia Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Bajaj Electricals Limited and some other companies. The activities undertaken by the appellant were liable to service tax under the category of business auxiliary services. As a result of investigations undertaken by DGCEI, it was found that the appellant was not discharging his service tax liabilities. However, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the appellant, who is an individual, as he was not aware of his liability to pay the tax. The appellant was under the bonafide belief that since he was only getting a commission from the service recipient, no liability under the business auxiliary service would arise. He submits that the entire services were being reflected by him in his balance sheet and the other statutory records, thus indica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned orders, I find that the appellant has been saddled with the suppression of facts on the only ground that he was not registered with the Department and was not filing ST-3 returns. Non-declaration of the fact tantamount to suppression of facts and, as such, he is liable to penalties. Apart from the fact that the appellant had not approached the Revenue for his registration under the S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
