9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax . Subsequently, they have taken registration but, found to have short paid service tax on various occasions. Accordingly an investigation was initiated by the officers of Sikkim Commissionerate and a show-cause notice dated 29.08.2011 was issued demanding Service Tax as below: (i) Rs 49,81,688/- under works contract service (ii) Rs 23,420 under Business Auxiliary Service (iii) Rs. 1,18.054 under Goods Transport Agency service 2. The said notice was adjudicated by Commissioner vide Order-in-Original No. 39/COM/ST/SLG/12-13 dated:26.04.2013, wherein he has confirmed the demands raised in the notice. He also demanded interest and imposed penalties. Aggrieved against the impugned order the appellant is before us. 3. In their submis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed. It is their argument the Appellant stated that they have paid the tax before issue of the notice and hence as per section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, the notice should not have been issued. Also, there is no fraud or suppression of fact involved and hence penalty equal to the duty demanded under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, should not have been imposed. 8. We observe that the Appellant has not paid the service tax on their own. The tax was paid only after initiation of investigation by the department. During the course of investigation , the Appellant has not cooperated with the department. They have furnished wrong information to the investigating authorities on various occasions. we observe that the adjudicating aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to September 2010". Again they deposited an amount of Rs.6,10,230/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Ten Thousand Two Hundred Thirty) towards gross value of taxable service received by them an amount of Rs.1,48,11,366/- (Rupees One Crore Forty Eight Lakhs Eleven Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Six) under the said TR-6 Challan i.e. Challan No.03 dated 05.04.2010 for the month of March 2010 which reflects in the periodical ST-3 return for the period "October 2009 to March 2010". They have shown same amount and same Challan and date for two consecutive periodical ST-3 returns without actually depositing the Service Tax into the credit of government account. It is observed from the final payment of certificate of M/s Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd as well as Ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by them. Thus, there was an intention to evade payment of service tax on the part of the appellant. Accordingly, we hold that penalty has been rightly imposed by the adjudicating authority under Section 78 of the Finance Act. Since the entire tax confirmed in the impugned order has already been paid, the adjudicating authority has given the option of payment of 25% of the tax amount as penalty. We find that the appellant had already paid the 25% of the duty as penalty, albeit 'under protest'. Thus, they have complied with the payment of duty and penalty as determined in the impugned order. 10. In view of the above discussion we uphold the impugned order passed by the adjudicating authority and dismiss the appeal filed by the Appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
