9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he scrutiny of the returns if filed or otherwise make best judgement assessment. The appellant had taken service tax registration and admittedly it had not filed any ST-3 returns. Even if the appellant was under the impression that it was not required to file returns or pay tax, there can be no justification whatsoever for the appellant to not reply to or provide information which is sought by the officers. Since the appellant had not supplied the information despite repeated reminders from the Range Superintendent, the Assistant Commissioner did what was best possible under the circumstances. Thus, the lower authorities were correct in concluding that the appellant had intention to evade payment of service tax and had suppressed prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecified rate from the service provider on the amount of service tax confirmed above, under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994; (3) I do not impose penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 on them as per power conferred upon me under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994; (4) I impose a penalty of Rs.1000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 on the service provider; (5) I impose a penalty upon the service provider, which is equivalent to the amount of Service Tax confirmed of Rs. 47,696/-under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994; However, the service provider may avail the benefit of payment of 25% of the penalty imposed on them under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, provided the said Service Tax amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be set aside. 6. Learned authorised representative for the Revenue supports the impugned order. 7. The only issue pressed before us by the appellant is that there was no suppression of facts and hence extended period of limitation could not have been invoked as the period involved is July 2003 to July 2004 and the show cause notice was issued on 12.01.2007. On the same ground, the appellant also contested that penalty should not have been imposed. The appellant does not dispute that it was provided maintenance and repair services during the period. 8. We find that the original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) have dealt with this issue of suppression of facts at length. It is recorded that the appellant submitted an applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e make best judgement assessment. The appellant had taken service tax registration and admittedly it had not filed any ST-3 returns. Even if the appellant was under the impression that it was not required to file returns or pay tax, there can be no justification whatsoever for the appellant to not reply to or provide information which is sought by the officers. Since the appellant had not supplied the information despite repeated reminders from the Range Superintendent, the Assistant Commissioner did what was best possible under the circumstances. He obtained details of the amounts received by the appellant from the Income Tax office and made an assessment. Under these circumstances, we find that the lower authorities were correct in conclu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
