S.C.V. Cable Net Vs Commissioner of Central Tax Tirupati (CESTAT Hyderabad)
CESTAT Hyderabad held that service tax demand on the service of Multi System Operator provided to cable TV operator is sustainable. Further, since there was suppression of facts to evade payment of service tax, extended period of limitation is duly invoked.
Facts- The appellants have been providing the services of cable operator and Multi System Operator’s Service in and around Tirupati. On 21.10.2009, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellants’ firm and also to Sri S.C.V. Dilip Kumar, Proprietor of M/s SCV Cable Net and N. Koundinya, CEO of the said firm. On adjudication, without considering the submissions made by the appellants, the Commissioner, Tirupati Commissionerate, confirmed demand of service tax of Rs. 2,61,17,081/- in respect of MSO/cable operator service, Rs. 6,67,440/- in respect of Sale of Space or time (including Education cess), demanded interest on the said amounts, and imposed penalties of Rs. 200/- per day under Section 77, Rs. 2,61,17,081 u/s. 78 and demanded late fee of Rs. 2,000/- for each return u/s. 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before this Tribunal.
Conclusion- Held that appellants have failed to disclose their correct income/gross value. They have failed to pay service tax after registration. They have paid service tax initially and therefore the ground that there was genuine confusion about taxability is also not tenable. No any reasonable cause for such failure to pay. Since appellants tried to suppress the fact to evade payment of service tax, therefore, period of limitation is rightly invoked in the SCN. No cogent or sufficient documentary evidence relating to payment of service tax has been adduced, so, question of credit of CENVAT does not arise. We are of the view that there is no merit in the appeals. Therefore, appeals are liable to be dismissed.
