TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is correct and needs to be considered as cum tax amount; upholding the service tax liability has having been conceded before the adjudicating authority, we direct the lower authorities to rework out the service tax liability and the interest thereof. CBE&C vide Circular No. 87/05/2006-ST dated 06/11/2006 has clarified that the amounts received as commission from the financial institutions/banks would be taxable under BAS. The said board circular specifically states that there were certain doubts in the mind of the field formation and hence, reference was made. We are of the considered view that if the field formation or the tax collectors were themselves in doubt and clarification has to be issued by the Board and the period involved in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns raised and confirmed the demands with interest and imposed penalties. In the interim period, appellant had discharged the service tax liability for the entire period. Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order on the ground that the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 is incorrect while the assessee/appellant is contesting the issue on merits. 3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/assessee takes us through the records. It is his submission that the service tax liability fastened upon the appellant is incorrect inasmuch as the CBE C in their Circular dated 06/11/2006 has specifically stated that there were doubts as to taxability of the amounts received as commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said section specifically provides for imposition of penalty of ₹ 200/- per day or 2% per month whichever is higher. 5. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. 6. On perusal of the records, we find that the appellant/assessee did not contest the issue on merits before the adjudicating authority. Before the adjudicating authority; only contest the appellant made was that no penalty be imposed on them in view of the full payment of tax and also due to financial difficulties, we agree with the learned DR that the appellant having not contested the issue on merits before the adjudicating authority, cannot do so before us. To that extent the impugned order, upholding the tax liability i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
