Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 334 - AT - Service TaxDemand of tax - cum tax benefit - the value of service shown in their profit and loss account was different that declared in their ST-3 return - Held that: - the appellants have not paid service tax on the total taxable value declared by them in their ST-3 return and consequently a demand of ₹ 4,59,665/- has been confirmed. The appellant in their appeal memorandum have contended that they have already paid this amount vide TR 6 challan which they claimed to have attached to their ST 3 return. The appellant had claimed that they will produced the said evidence during the hearing before Tribunal however no such evidence have been produced. In these circumstances there is no option but to confirm the said demand. Extended period of limitation - Held that: - The appellants have not disputed that the figure show in their ST-3 Return did not match with the figures shown in their balance sheet. In these circumstances invocation of extended period of limitation is justified. Simultaneous penalty u/s 76 and 78 - It has been argued that after 10.5.2008, when the act was amended, penalties under both these Section cannot be imposed simultaneously - Held that: - The appellant in their grounds of appeal, have not given any reason why the same finding needs to be disturbed. Consequently imposition of penalty under Section 76 & 78 is upheld. Penalty u/s 77 - Held that: - The appellants have not filed the S.T.3 returns in proper time and therefore penalties under Section 77 have rightly been imposed. The matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority for redetermination of duty after granting cum tax benefit on receipt basis - appeal allowed in part and part matter on remand.
|