TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 784X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents - The contention of the appellant that quarterly returns are to be filed is erroneous since the quarterly returns were replaced by Half-yearly returns with effect from 16.10.1998, vide notification 57/1998 S.T. dated 07.10.1998. Accordingly, there was time to issue the instant show-cause notice upto 25.04.2009; whereas the instant show-cause notice was issued on 20.04.2009. Therefore, it is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... presentative and perused the records. 4. The issue involved in this case is regarding the Service Tax liability during the period 01.10.2003 to 09.09.2004 under the category of Maintenance and Repair Services . It is undisputed that appellant has rendered services to their clients. The appellant had not paid Service Tax for this period despite taking Service Tax registration and reminders from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recovery of Service Tax which had not been levied or paid was required to be issued within five years from the relevant date . For the purpose of Section 73 relevant date is defined in Section 73(6). In cases where under the rules made under Chapter V of the said Act, a periodic return is to be filed by an assessee, the date of filing of such return would be the relevant date and in cases where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2009. Therefore, it is clearly evident the show-cause notice was validly issued and cannot be termed as time-barred in respect of any portion covered by it. We find nothing in consistent in the findings of appellate authority, as it is on record that appellant had discharged the Service Tax liability for the earlier period and for the subsequent period accepting that he is liable to pay the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
