TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 286X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned period. The appellant has put forward the contention that they were not able to produce necessary documents at the time of adjudication so as to claim the input tax credit. It is submitted by her that they now have the documents for the year 2010-11 - the matter can be remanded for the limited purpose of looking into the claim of the appellant with regard to input tax credit for the period 2010-2011 The demand for the period upto 2009-2010 is upheld - the demand confirmed for the period after 1.4.2010 till 20.08.2011 is remanded to the adjudicating authority who shall re-determine the liability after taking into consideration the claim of the appellant with regard to input tax credit. So also, the benefit of imposing lesser penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tment under appropriate service. So also, they have not filed ST-3 returns during the material time. Against such order, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the Order-in-Original and dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. Hence this appeal. 2. The appellant was represented by its proprietrix Ms. Chithrra. It was argued by her that appellant had taken registration in 2007 and that the allegation that the appellant has not registered is factually incorrect. The service tax was not paid as they were facing financial problems and the money collected was put in the business of the appellant. At the time of adjudication proceedings, the appellant could not produce relevant documents so as to claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned period. 6. The appellant has put forward the contention that they were not able to produce necessary documents at the time of adjudication so as to claim the input tax credit. It is submitted by her that they now have the documents for the year 2010-11. Taking note of this request, I am of the view that the matter can be remanded for the limited purpose of looking into the claim of the appellant with regard to input tax credit for the period 2010-2011. In para 8 of the OIA, it is discussed that as per the proviso to Section 28 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994, only 50% of the service tax involved can be imposed as penalty if the details of the transactions are available from the records. The said proviso was introduced on 08.04.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
