TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order] - This appeal is directed against the order in appeal-dated 11-7-2005 whereby it is held that the appellant is liable to pay the service tax and the penalties for non-payment of such tax. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellant was registered in 1998 as a service provider under the Service Tax provisions as security Agency. They did not pay the service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... They did not divulge the information of receipt of an amount against the services provided by them. The authorities had collected the information and on confronting the appellant about the payment, he agreed the receipt thereof. This is unbecoming of a registered service provider. He should have declared total receipts of the amount to the authorities and discharged the tax liability. Further I fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amount and sought to clarify that there are discrepancies which would have definitely invoked some response from the department. Hence I hold that the appellant has not made out a case in his favour on any counts. 6. In view of the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order-in-appeal. The appeal is dismissed. (Pronounced on 26-4-2006) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
