2014 (7) TMI 1163 - HC - Service Tax

Appeal against the order of the tribunal 2013 (11) TMI 1576 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - If the grievance of the appellant is that a submission in regard to the imposition of the penalty which was urged before the Tribunal has not been considered, the appropriate remedy would be to move the Tribunal itself for such a grievance. - No Reason to entertain the appeal - Decided against the assessee.

Summary

Issues: Appeal against order of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding demand of interest and imposition of penalty.

Analysis:
1. Demand of Interest: The Tribunal dismissed the appeal by the assessee, upholding the demand of interest for the period between the due date for the payment of service tax and the actual payment date. The Tribunal emphasized that due to the admitted default, there was no legal provision allowing for the waiver of interest. The High Court, after perusing the memo of appeal, found no grounds challenging the Tribunal's decision on the interest demand. Consequently, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision on the interest issue.

2. Imposition of Penalty: The appellant did not dispute the liability to pay interest but contested the imposition of the penalty. The High Court noted that the appellant had not raised any specific ground in the memo of appeal regarding the Tribunal's consideration of the penalty imposition issue. The Court suggested that if the appellant believed that the Tribunal had not adequately considered their submission on the penalty imposition, the appropriate course of action would be to approach the Tribunal directly with a grievance on this matter. As the High Court found no reason to entertain the appeal based on the grounds considered by the Tribunal, the appeal was ultimately dismissed.

3. Appellate Remedy: The High Court clarified that if there were any points raised before the Tribunal that were not adequately addressed, the appellant could seek redress by filing an appropriate application before the Tribunal itself. By leaving this option open to the appellant, the High Court ensured that any unaddressed issues could be properly pursued through the appropriate legal channels. Overall, the High Court's judgment focused on the specific grounds raised in the appeal and the necessity of addressing legal issues through the proper judicial procedures.