TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stated as under :- The appellants were engaged in providing Consulting Engineering Services. They were registered with the Central Excise Department under Section 69 of the Finance Act (hereinafter referred to as an 'Act'). On inquiry carried out by the officers of Central Excise, it revealed that they had been providing consulting engineering service to the Command Area Development (CAD), Bikaner during the period 7-7-1997 to 31-3-1999 on which the total amount of service tax payable by them was Rs. 9,11,414/-. But they failed to deposit this amount in time. They however, deposited only Rs. 7,11,191/- on 24-2-1999 and furnished ST 3 returns for the quarters ending September, 1997, December, 1997, March, 1998 and June, 1998. They willf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act could be legally imposed on the appellants. Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner deserves to be set aside. 5. On the other hand ld. SDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order of the Commissioner and argued that on account of failure on the part of the appellants to deposit the service tax in time, the penalties under Sections 75 to 78 have rightly been imposed on them and that there had also been suppression of facts on the part of appellants in respect of the services rendered by them to the CAD. 6. We have heard Shri K.K. Anand, Advocate for the appellants and Shri Mewa Singh, SDR for the Revenue and have gone through the record. 7. A bare perusal of the impugned order of the Commissioner sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o in our view is not tenable. There is nothing on record to suggest if the appellants disclosed that they were rendering consulting services to the CAD. The service tax has been deposited by them only after the inquiry was conducted by the Department regarding their activity. When the Department came to know that they were engaged in providing consulting engineering services to the CAD they then deposited service tax amount of Rs. 7,11,199/-, still even leaving the balance of Rs. 2,00,215/- as unpaid. The period for which they did not pay the service tax is from 7-7-1997 to 31-3-1999. Therefore, keeping in view their conduct and facts and circumstances of the case, in our view the Commissioner has rightly charged them with suppression ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
