2017 (5) TMI 1253 - AT - Service Tax

Extended period of limitation - maintenance and repair service including sale of materials used in the course of repair and maintenance - Held that - no case of suppression of facts or contumacious conduct on the part of the appellant is made out. It is admitted fact that the appellant have made suo-moto compliance by applying for registration and have started paying the taxes and filing returns. It is also admitted fact that prior to issue of SCN in October 2008. The appellant have suo-moto paid the admitted taxes for the prior period from 2003-04 to 2005-06 in March 2008 and also submitted the returns - extended period of limitation not invocable - penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Invocation of extended period of limitation for the period from 2003-04 to 2006-07.
2. Applicability of penalties under Section 76 and 75A of the Finance Act, 1994.
3. Adjustment of interest amount deposited towards penalty under Section 77/70 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant-assessee provided maintenance and repair services without obtaining/ applying for Service Tax registration, leading to a Show Cause Notice in 2008. The appellant voluntarily registered with the Service Tax Department in 2006 and paid admitted taxes for the period from 2003-04 to 2005-06 before the issuance of the notice. The Adjudicating Authority dropped the demand after considering the material used in repair/maintenance. The appellate authority upheld the penalty but the Tribunal found no suppression of facts by the appellant. Consequently, penalties under Section 76 and 75A were set aside, retaining only the interest for delayed payment.

Issue 2:
The appellant argued that the Show Cause Notice was not tenable as they had voluntarily complied by registering and paying taxes before the notice. The Revenue contended that the impugned order should be upheld. The Tribunal observed that the appellant's proactive compliance and payment of admitted taxes for previous years demonstrated good faith. As no suppression of facts was established, penalties under Section 76 and 75A were deemed unwarranted, and only interest for delayed payment was upheld.

Issue 3:
Regarding the adjustment of interest from the amount deposited towards penalty under Section 77/70 of the Finance Act, 1994, the Tribunal directed the Authority to adjust the interest amount from the penalty deposit made by the appellant. The appellant was instructed to pay the balance interest, if not already done, within 60 days from the delivery of the order copy and comply with the Adjudicating Authority.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, setting aside penalties under Section 76 and 75A while retaining the interest amount for delayed payment and directing the adjustment of interest from the penalty deposit.