9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellant that they were under bona fide impression, they should have declared their past transactions i.e., prior to obtaining the service tax registration to the authorities as soon as they received the first letter from the lower authorities – demand of service tax with interest and penalty upheld. - ST/25 OF 2008 - 209 OF 2009 - Dated:- 18-3-2009 - T.K. JAYARAMAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER AND M.V. RAVINDRAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER G.P. Sastry for the Appellant. Mrs. Sudha Koka for the Respondent. ORDER M.V. Ravindran, Judicial Member.- This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No.8/2007 (V-I) ST, dated 8-10-2007. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellants are provider of service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e service tax due as directed by the department. The appellants contended that they have not collected any amount towards service tax for the services rendered by them. I find that this cannot be held to be a valid reason for non-payment of service tax. The appellant put forth that they have paid the amount due before the issue of show-cause notice and adjudication proceedings and rely on the decision given in the case of M/s. RINL cited supra. I find that the appellants paid only Rs. 75,000 out of the demand of Rs. 1,19,803 before the issue of the notice and the balance amount along with interest was paid subsequent to the issue of the notice. Therefore, I find that the appellants have paid the service tax amount in instalments during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Finance Act, 1994. In view of the above decisions, the appellant's plea that the service tax paid before issue of show-cause notice hence interest and penalty cannot be imposed is not acceptable." Appellants are before us against the said order. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in upholding the order of the Adjudicating Authority. It is his submission that the appellants carried out the repairs and construction of jobs of various pipelines and various equipments in the premises of M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Product Ltd., Visakhapatnam. It is his submission that number of clarifications have been issued wherein it was made clear that repairing act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d with. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. 5.1 It is seen that the findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) [as reproduced hereinabove in paragraph 2.1] very clearly indicate that the services rendered by the appellants viz., "Maintenance and Repair Services; Commissioning and installation Services; and Testing and Inspection Certificate Services" are not disputed by the appellants. The appellants have obtained the registration in February 2005. The said services came under Service Tax net from 1-7-2003. We find that the information regarding the past transaction i.e., prior to the taking of the registration, was not furnished by the appellants to the authorities and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
