2020 (2) TMI 1069

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gned order the sole reason for imposing penalty by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is that the basic contravention of rule in this case is non-declaration of correct taxable value in their ST-3 returns for the period 2015-2016 and short payment of service tax for the said period therefore, penalty is imposable on the appellant. The appellant has paid service tax at the time of audit and duri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in construction services and also providing manpower recruitment agency services. An audit was conducted for the period April 2015 to March, 2016 and during the course of audit, it was pointed out that the appellant has short paid the service tax on these services. On pointing out by the audit, t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... use notice, therefore, the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 is imposable on the appellant. 5. Heard the learned Authorized Representative and perused the record. 6. On perusal of the record, I find that in the impugned order the sole reason for imposing penalty by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is that the basic contravention of rule in this case is non-declaration of co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X