Case Law Details
M.K. Enterprises Vs Commissioner of CGST & CX (CESTAT Kolkata)
CESTAT Kolkata held that the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in subsequent show cause notice, where the Department has earlier issued Show Cause Notice in respect of the same subject-matter.
Facts- The Appellant is engaged in providing services to IOCL and such services are ‘taxable services’ under Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 under the category ‘Works Contract Service’, ‘Maintenance & Repair Service’, ‘Manpower Recruitment/Supply Service’ and ‘Cleaning Service’. It is the case of the Service Tax department that the Appellant have not filed their ST-3 returns on time and have not paid Service Tax on the entire consideration received from IOCL for the period impugned in the current proceeding.
Thus, the Show Cause Notice was issued to the Appellant seeking payment of Service Tax on the entire value received from IOCL as per Form 26AS and Balance sheet for the impugned period by applying the highest rate of Service Tax and without describing the nature of services provided by the Appellant as well as without considering the payments made by the Appellant as service tax for the said period and by invoking extended period of limitation by alleging suppression of facts by the Appellant.
Notably, entire demand was confirmed, without allowing any abatement. Further, interest was levied and equal penalty was imposed u/s 77. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
