2019 (9) TMI 121 - AT - Service Tax

Imposition of penalty u/s 77(1)(a) and section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - non-payment of service tax under reverse charge mechanism - GTA service - intent to evade present or not? - HELD THAT - The levy of service tax under GTA service under reverse charge was a new subject for which there was non-payment of tax. The assessee is a PSU. No evidence has been brought on record to show that tax was deliberately not paid. On being pointed out, the assessee obtained service tax registration and made the payment by availing prescribed abatement. The appellant is entitled to relief under Section 80 of the Act for waiver of penalty - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Imposition of penalty under section 77(1)(a) and section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:

1. Background and Facts:
The appeal was filed by M/s. Dankuni Coal Complex, a unit of South Eastern Coalfields Ltd., regarding non-payment of service tax under reverse charge mechanism for availing services from Goods Transport Agencies (GTA) during 2007-2008 to 2011-12. After an enquiry, the appellant obtained registration and paid the service tax with prescribed abatement. The Order-in-Original dated 30.09.2013 confirmed the service tax, penalties under sections 78 and 77(1)(a) of the Act, but reduced the penalty under section 77(1)(a) due to the harshness of the imposed penalty.

2. Appeal and Revision:
The Revenue appealed against the reduced penalty, resulting in the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) revising the penalty amounts under sections 77 and 78 of the Act. The appellant then approached the Tribunal seeking waiver of penalties under sections 77 and 78 without disputing the service tax applicability.

3. Arguments:
The appellant argued that the non-payment of service tax was due to an inadvertent mistake, citing precedents where penalties were set aside for similar reasons. They emphasized that the appellant rectified the situation promptly upon notification by the department, obtaining registration and paying the tax with interest. The appellant also highlighted the discretionary power of the adjudicating authority to waive penalties under section 80 of the Act.

4. Decision:
After considering the arguments and precedents, the Tribunal found that the levy of service tax under GTA service under reverse charge was a new subject, and there was no evidence of deliberate non-payment by the appellant. The appellant's prompt action upon notification, payment of differential tax, and lack of dispute regarding the demand were noted. Citing relevant case laws, the Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to relief under Section 80 of the Act for waiver of penalties. Consequently, the penalties under section 77(1)(a) and section 78 were set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential benefits.

This judgment showcases the importance of prompt rectification of inadvertent mistakes in tax compliance and the discretionary power of authorities to waive penalties based on reasonable causes established by the assessee.