TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1031X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the respondent for a part of the period which is covered in the present proceeding - the Department was precluded from issuing another SCN invoking the suppression clause. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - ST/256/2007-DB - 22981 / 2017 - Dated:- 8-12-2017 - SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V. PADMANABHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER Shri N. Jagadish, Superintendent(AR), For the Appellant Shri T. V. Ajayan, Advocate, For the Respondent Per : V. PADMANABHAN The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No. 125-07 dated 15/03/2007. The respondent is engaged in providing taxable service under the category of consulting engineer service . Show-cause notice was issued and the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suppression of facts to invoke longer time limit. Revenue has contended that he should not have invoked this decision inasmuch as the Department became aware of the full service tax liability of the respondent only after the details were submitted at the time of recording the statement of the company officials on 24/01/2005. iii. The entire service tax dues already stands paid by the respondent and Revenue has prayed that the same may be upheld. iv. Revenue has prayed that the impugned order may set aside and the Order-in-original be restored. 2. With the above background, we have heard Shri N. Jagadish, Superintendent(AR) for the Revenue and Shri T.V. Ajayan, Advocate for the respondent. 3. Learned AR reiterated the grounds of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fully justified in view of the fact that the Department cannot issue more than one show-cause notice overlapping the same period, by invoking the extended time limit. He also relied upon several case laws. 5. We have heard both sides and perused records. 6. The crux of the issue before us in the Revenue s challenge to the impugned order is whether the Department was entitled to issue show-cause notice dt. 21/04/2005 for demand of service tax, by invoking the longer time limit under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. We have perused the impugned order in which the learned Commissioner(Appeals) has recorded the finding that during the period July 1997 to September 2003, which overlaps with the period covered under the show-cause not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
