9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t paid Service Tax amounting to Rs. 1,07,93,581/- during the period from July 1994 to march 2004. The appellant was served with Show Cause Notice dated 25/10/2004 purposing to demand Service Tax found to have been short paid. Further, interest on the late payment of Service Tax amounting to Rs. 67,94,198/- was also demanded. After the dew process of Adjudication, the Adjudicating Authority passed the impugned order in which he upheld the demand of Rs. 93,48,698/- for the period of April 1999 to March 2004. The rest of the demand, which fell beyond the period of 5 years, was dropped. However, he ordered payment of interest and also imposed penalty for amount equal to Service Tax demand. The impugned Order stands challenged in the present app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DOT but also to BSNL but the department has not given the benefit of such exemptions. (iv) He challenged the work-sheet attached to SCN by submitting that the department has summarily worked-out the service tax due @ 5% of the amount recovered. Such amount recovered also included the exempted services and re-calculation adopted by the department was incorrect. (v) Lastly, he submitted that the matter may be remanded for re-verification and to arrive at the correct demand of Service Tax. 4. The Ld. DR justified the impugned order. He referred to the findings of the Adjudicating Authority, in Para 5.2 & 5.3 in which he recorded that the claim of the appellant pertaining to the period falling under DOT has not been substantiated by submiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by taking into account, the misgivings pointed out on behalf of the appellant. The demand pertains to a very old period from April 1994 to March 2004. Considering the fact that even at the time of adjudication i. e., in 2008 the appellant was unable to submit documentary evidence to support their arguments, we are of the view that no useful purpose will be served by remanding the matter for further verification and recalculation. The Adjudicating Authority has already restricted the demand to the period of five years from the date of Show Cause Notice. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, we have no option but to up-hold the demand confirmed by Adjudicating Authority with interest. But on the question of penalty, we are inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
