9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1505X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short "Appellate Tribunal"). The Appellants in these three Appeals had rented their vehicles to a company Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd., ("I.P.C.L.") Village - Nagothane, District Raigad on annual contract basis. The case of the Appellants is that they got themselves registered under service tax. Therefore, three show cause notices were issued to the Appellants proposing recovery of service tax for the period from October 2002 to March 2004. On 8th September 2004, the Appellants received show cause notices for the period between April 2000 to December 2002. The notices also make a claim for recovery of interest and penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o issue of time bar, on the last date, we have granted time to the learned counsel appearing for the Appellants to take instructions, in view of what is specifically recorded in 5.1 as quoted earlier. Paragraph 5.1 records a statement of the Appellants that they are not contesting issue on merits but only on the ground of time bar. Today, learned counsel appearing for the Appellants submitted that in fact submissions were canvassed not only on the issue of time bar but also on merits. We may note here that the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the Appellants have been elaborately noted in paragraph 3 of the impugned judgment, which show that the challenge was confined only on the ground of time bar and no other point was argu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As far as Appellant in Central Excise Appeal No. 184 of 2015 is concerned, from paragraph 3 of the impugned judgment, it appears that there is no argument canvassed based on show cause notice of 16th June, 2004 and arguments were confined to show cause notices dated 11th August 2003 and 3rd December 2003, 8. The Appellants had placed reliance on a decision of the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Kuldeep Singh Gill Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2005 (186) ELT 373. The Appellate Tribunal noted that the decision in the case of Kuldeep Singh (Supra), was rendered on 12th May 2005. The show causes notices were issued on 8th September 2004. Therefore, there is no question of Appellants bona fide believing that they were not liable to pay s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to obtain details from I.P.C.L., Nagothane. After obtaining the information from the said Company, the impugned notices dated 8th September 2004 were issued. A finding of fact has been recorded that non-filing of documents as required by summons and non appearance before the authorities is a deliberate violation of law and, therefore, the charge of suppression of facts is clearly borne out from the conduct of the Appellants. It was held that the notices issued on 8th September 2004 were not in continuation of notices for the previous period. The finding of fact is that, the notices issued on 8th September 2004 were not based on identical facts or identical evidences. In view of the aforesaid findings of fact recorded by the Appellate Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
