TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 018 - Dated:- 24-7-2018 - MR. M.V.RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And MR. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Pawan Kumar, Superintendent/AR for the Appellant Shri M.V.S. Sridhar, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER [ Order Per : M. V. Ravindran ] 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No.06/2009 (G) (ST), dated 06.05.2009. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration, after filtering out unnecessary details are, it is noticed that show cause notice was issued for demanding differential Service Tax from the respondent for the period 01.04.2003 to 30.11.2004 on the ground that there is a difference of amounts reflected in the ST3 returns and the ledger accounts. This allegat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmission that assessee did not submit any specific/justifiable reason for non-reflection of income received towards services rendered by them in the ST3 returns and cannot be considered as mere omission but under-assessment of tax which has resulted in short payment of tax. It is his submission that the information in the Income Tax returns in which the gross amount was shown is not matching with the income shown in the Service Tax returns, is itself indicative that the assessee had intentionally undervalued the services declared in the ST3 returns. Based upon such argument the appeal is preferred. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent submits that on the question of invoices there are no two separate set of invoices; and that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 03 alleging that the appellants have not shown correct taxable services in their ST-3 returns, by invoking the extended period of limitation. I find that the issue in the present show cause notice, which is also emanated from the Ledger, Balance Sheets and Income Tax returns for the respective years, i.e., from 01.04.2003 to 31.03.2007, of the appellant company, is also similar to the earlier one. Hence, extended period cannot be invoked for the subsequent period. I find that the decisions relied cannot be invoked for the subsequent period. I find that the decisions relied by the appellants in this regard are more relevant to the facts of the case and the appellants case is squarely covered by the case law relied upon by the appellants as i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
