TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 518X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat there should be non-levy, short levy, short payment or erroneous refund of Service Tax by reason of fraud or collusion or wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of the Chapter or the rules made thereunder with the intention to evade payment of Service Tax, is not satisfied and accordingly, Section 78 ibid. would not be attracted in the present ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 26.04.2018 was issued covering the following periods: (i) 01.07.2012 to 31.05.2015; (ii) 01.06.2015 to 31.10.2015; (iii) 01.11.2015 to 31.05.2016; and (iv) 01.06.2016 to 30.06.2017 alleging that the appellant was not correctly paying Service Tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism ( RCM for short) on the Legal Opinion received from their empanelled advocates. A draft Order-in-Or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mposed when there is non-levy, short levy, short payment or erroneous refund by reason of fraud, collusion, wilful mis-statement, etc., on the part of an assessee with an intention to evade the payment of Service Tax. It is apparent that Section 78 can be invoked in case where there is non-levy, short-levy, short payment or erroneous refund of Service Tax by reason of fraud or collusion or wilful ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ginal, however, has ignored the very taxability without clearing the above doubts. This is sufficient to hold that the appellant has only acted in good faith being a public sector undertaking. 5.2 Moreover, the alleged liability captured in the form of tables in the draft Order-in-Original apparently were all picked up from the appellant s Books available with the Revenue. 6. Thus, under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ataka State Tourism Development Corporation v. Commissioner of Central Tax, Bangalore North [Service Tax Appeal No. 224 of 2009 in Final Order No. 21289 of 2018 dated 04.12.2018 CESTAT, Bangalore]; (ii) M/s. Karnataka State Tourism Dev. Corpn. Ltd. v. C.S.T., Bangalore [2011 (21) S.T.R. 518 (Tri. Bang.)]; (iii) B.S.N.L. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad [2009 (14) S.T.R. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
