AMIT KHANNA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BHOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant provide the taxable service of cable network. They took Service Tax registration sometime in 2004 under the voluntary disclosure scheme. Sometime in September 2002, they had taken over M/s. Satcom Network another cable operator which belonged to Shri Pritpal Singh Saini. The Service Tax records of the appellant including M/s. Satcom Network which had been taken over by the appellants, were checked by the Jurisdictional Central Excise officers. In respect of the appellants, the officers detected short payment of Service Tax to the tune of Rs. 21,152/ - for the period from 1 -7 -2004 to 31 -3 -2005. In course of scrutiny of the records of Satcom Network, it was found that no Service Tax was being paid on the amount being received on the ground that the appellant's total turnover during the financial year was less than Rs. 4,00,000/ - and they were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 6/2005 -S.T. However, on the scrutiny of the records, it was found that their actual collection was much higher. The short payment of Service Tax by the appellant for the period from 2005 -2006 to 2007 -2008 was determined as Rs. 3,12,156/ -, which was in addition to short payment of Rs. 21,152/ - for the period from 2004 -2005. The Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner vide order -in -original dated 18 -2 -2010 confirmed the Service Tax demand of Rs. 3,33,308/ - against the appellant along with interest on it for the period from 2004 -2005 to 2007 -2008 and beside this, imposed penalty of Rs. 1,000/ - on them under Section 77 and penalty of Rs. 3,33,308/ - under Sections 76 and 78. On appeal to Commissioner (Appeals), he vide order -in -appeal dated 18 -2 -2010 dismissed their appeal. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals) this appeal along with stay application has been filed. Heard both the sides in respect of stay application.

(2.) WE have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. Prima facie, we are of the view that even though M/s. Satcom Network had been taken over by the appellant, Service Tax liability in respect of the value of the services provided was not being fully discharged. However, if during the years in respect of which the exemption under Notification No. 6/2005 -ST. as sought to be denied to the appellant and Service Tax is demanded, they would be entitled for Cenvat credit in respect of input services. However, even if the Cenvat credit in respect of input service is allowed, there would be some net Service Tax demand. In view of this, this is not the case for total waiver. The appellant are directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 50,000/ - (Rupees Fifty Thousand) within a period of eight weeks from the date of this order. Compliance to be reported on 5th December 2011.