9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 2063X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case are that the appellant is an Export House primarily engaged in export of food grains and in the process, have incurred expenses, both for export and domestic sales. The appellant also provided space/godown to various clients and collected rents from such clients. Search was conducted by DGCEI on 08.07.2014. Pursuance to the proceedings the appellant assessee paid Rs. 5,33,141/- towards ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t out of the total demand of Rs. 3,27,164/- on GTA Service, they have already paid Rs. 1,01,724/- through the service providers and therefore, there was no occasion for the appellant assessee to pay again under RCM. It is his submission that once the amount has been paid by the service provider, Department cannot claim it under RCM for the second time from the service recipient. Regarding the bala ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e service tax amount alongwith interest was paid much before the issuance of the show cause notice and in terms of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, the show cause notice was not at all warranted and no penalty is imposable under Explanation 2 appended thereto. 3. Ld. DR reiterates the orders of the lower authorities. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. I find that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Service'. It has also been alleged that the appellant has consciously suppressed the fact from the Department. 6. I also find that the allegation against the appellant for invocation of Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 is without any material on record. It is well settled that the Department has to place some material on record of suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
