9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 363X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct from 16.11.2004. During audit of accounts, it was noticed that the appellant delayed payment of service tax on several occasions to the tune of Rs. 2,67,31,766/- and have not paid interest for such delayed payment. It was also noticed that they have not paid service tax of Rs. 4,48,583/- in respect of services provided to other customers during the May and June 2005. Show cause notice dated 28.2.2008 was issued raising the above allegations and after due process of law, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 2,71,80,349/- being the service tax for the period 10.9.2004 to 31.3.2007 along with interest and also appropriated the amount of Rs. 2,67,31,766/- which was already paid by the appellant. The adjudicating authority a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tural gas service vide S.T. Regn No. AAAFJ3189KST001 on 16.11.2004. The appellant vide their letter dated 25.11.2004 once again put forth before ONGC that the accepted rates for 2004-05 are excluding service tax and hence service tax, if any payable is to the account of ONGC. Copy of the letters dated 16.09.2004 and 25.11.2004 were furnished before the authorities before. The appellant paid service tax of Rs. 1,27,793/- on 28.05.2005 to the exchequer voluntarily without any recovery from ONGC. However, as ONGC refused to pay service tax the appellant thereafter could not pay service tax. Further, appellant had entered into contract with M/s. M/s. Geofizyka Tourn (GT) to provide shot hole drilling services. The said services were provided du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthority. 4. Against this, the ld. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that there was deliberate delay as well as non-payment of service tax on the part of the appellant. The same would not have come to light but for the audit conducted by the department. Therefore, the penalty imposed is legal and proper. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. On behalf of the appellant, it is submitted that they are not contesting the liability to pay service tax. The main argument put forward are with regard to penalty imposed. It is submitted by ld. Counsel that in fact the appellant had paid the entire service tax liability and interest thereon and the same has not been taken note of by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax by suppressing or mis-declaring facts. Further, the issue was subject matter of litigation before the Tribunal and being an interpretational issue, the penalty imposed is too harsh on the appellant. On such score, the penalty of Rs. 2.75 crores imposed, in our view, is unjustified and requires to be set aside, which we hereby do. 7. Taking note of the contentions of the appellant that the amount that has been already discharged by them has not been properly taken note of and requires verification, we direct the adjudicating authority to consider the same and if there is any short fall to be discharged by the appellant, they shall be liable to discharge the service tax along with interest. We do not disturb the demand of service tax o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
