2018 (2) TMI 1410

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. ORDER Per. B. Ravichandran The appeal is against order dated 17/10/2012 of Commissioner (Appeals), Bhopal. The appellants are engaged in providing taxable services under various categories and were registered with the Department for such payment. They were also filing regular ST-3 returns with the Department. The dispute in the present cas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y demand was made against the appellant. The nature of service rendered and the service recipient and the amount attributable to such service has not been explained at all in the show cause notice. The appellant filed detailed break up figures and defended their case. Still the lower authorities proceeded to confirm the demand without verifying the details or justifying the demand. 3. The learned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... istinguish the different service centres. Further, we note that the show cause notice did not give any reason to allege short levy except the difference between balance sheet and the ST-3 returns. We note in the appellant's own case for the earlier period, same dispute came up before the Tribunal in 2015 (37) S.T.R. 308 (Tri. - Del.). It was observed that in the show cause notice there is not even .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X