9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evy of tax but services provided after 1.7.03. It is seen that initially, there was a Board's Circular to the effect that such collection of fees prior to 1.7.03, though for the services to be rendered after the said date would not get included in the value of the services. However, subsequently, the Board issued another Circular dated 5.11.03 clarifying that since services were being provided after 1.7.03, any amount collected towards such service to before the said date would be leviable to service tax. 2. Apart part from assailing the impugned order on merits, the appellant has contended that the same is barred by limitation inasmuch as the show cause notice was issued on 28.12.04 that is much beyond the normal period of limitation. Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt in the case of Pushpam Pharmaceuticals - 1995 (78) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.), the appellant had suppressed the facts by deliberately not disclosing all the relevant information in the ST-3 return for even subsequently and that failure to disclose the relevant information is deliberate suppression of facts to evade payment of duty, is well founded. In views of the same, the different judgments cited by the appellant, viz., Commr. of Central Excise, Chennai v. EID Perry - 2005 (179) E.L.T. 447, Shahnaz Ayurvedas v. C.C.E., NOIDA - 2004 (173) E.L.T. 33 (All.) and Thyssan Krup JBM Pvt. Ltd. - 2005 (180) E.L.T. 285 (Commr. (A) are not applicable to the present case. The appellant's contention based on different judgments that extended period is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur against the notice issued by the Superintendent, Central Excise (Service Tax), Indore, M.P However, it is to inform you that your branch situated at Vadodara is independently registered with Vadodara - I Commissionerate and you are not centrally registered at Indore, further your Vadodara branch is not covered under the jurisdiction of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur and hence the above mention Writ Petition does not have any bearing on your non payment of service tax. Hence you are requested to pay up the service tax amounting to Rs.1,62,508/-, which has been short paid, along with interest immediately." In response to the above letter, the appellant reiterated their stand of having filed a writ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tement, we are providing the same. The details of Service Tax on fees collected prior to 1-7-03 but services rendered thereafter as per statement enclosed". 5. It becomes clear from the above correspondences that the fact that the appellant had collected advance fees prior to 1-7-03 from their students for the services to be provided after 1-7-03 was in the knowledge of the Revenue. Not only that, the Superintendent had also calculated the tax amount as Rs. 1,62,508/- which quantification was accepted by the appellant. As such, the findings of the authorities below that the appellant had not disclosed the above factual position to the Revenue are contrary to the above evidence on record. Inasmuch as the entire information was in the knowle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
