9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lligence records were called for, as scrutiny and it was noticed that during the period of 01.04.1998 to 30.09.2005, 1.04.1998 to September, 2005 there was escapement of service tax, seemed that appellant have not discharged service tax liability of amounts received for Screen Printing, Art Printing, art it work and preparation and display are exhibition of advertisements on holdings by the erection and installation of large advertisements on holdings at various places. To arrive such question revenue authorities also held that there is miss match in the figures of income tax returns and the ST Returns filed by the appellant Show Cause Notice was adjudicated and demands were confirmed with interest on penalties were imposed. Aggrieved by su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for assessment separate provisions lays down during period and the said provision of Section 73(1) Finance Act, 1994 as was relevant for the period in queue in hence Show Cause Notice dated 06.10.2005 and it is hit by limitation. 4. Ld. Departmental re-presentative on the other hand reiterated findings of the adjudicating authority. 5. On careful consideration of the submission made by both sides we find that the issue that arises for consideration in this case is whether the adjudicating authority was correct in coming to conclusion as to appellant has short paid the service at liability during relevant period in question or otherwise 6. The remand order of the Bench dated 21.05.2009, specifically directed that the adjudicating authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... invoices also raised by the appellants are for display of the holdings, on which applicable service tax is discharged. From the factual matrix we do find strong force in the contentions raised by the appellant that they are only supply the printed materials for such art work given by the their clients. Surprisingly, the adjudicating authority has not recorded any findings on this factual position. 8. We also find that appellants counsel was correct in arguing that demands confirmed by the adjudicating authority is based on the income recorded in the Income Tax Returns is wrong. It is a fact that during the period in question, Income Tax Act mandated for declaring the accrued income, while the Finance Act, 1994 mandated for discharge of Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
