2014 (8) TMI 229 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of penalty - Penalty u/s 78 & 80 - Tax collected but delay in making deposit - Held that - keeping in view the nature of dispute, explanation given by the respondent as also the fact that the demand constitutes only .17% of the tax paid during 2007-08 and 2.2% of the tax paid during 2006-07, Respondents have been able to explain that there was reasonable cause for the said failure and Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly waived the penalty - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against waiver of penalty under Section 80 of the Finance Act by Commissioner (Appeals) based on demand notice for service tax, interest, and penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:

1. Background: The respondent was involved in Commercial Construction Service and Works Contract Service. A demand notice was issued for service tax, interest, and penalties. The Additional Commissioner upheld the demand and penalties, including under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeals) waived the penalty under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.

2. Breakdown of Demands: The demand included various components: (i) a delayed payment without penalty imposition due to dealing hands' absence, (ii) non-payment due to a client dispute regarding abatement and Cenvat Credit, (iii) a discrepancy in service tax amounts, and (iv) a TDS-related service tax payment issue.

3. Respondent's Position: The respondent argued that there was no intention to evade duty, the disputed amount was minimal compared to total payments, and delays were due to reasonable causes. They filed a cross-objection supporting the waiver of penalty under Section 80 of the Finance Act.

4. Arguments: The Revenue contended that delays and disputes were not reasonable causes for non-payment, thus penalties should apply. The respondent argued that the delays were minimal, payments were made promptly after notice, and the demand constituted a small percentage of total tax payments.

5. Judgment: The Tribunal considered Section 80 of the Finance Act, which states that no penalty shall be imposed if there was a reasonable cause for the failure. The Tribunal found the respondent's explanations satisfactory, especially considering the small percentage the demand represented in their total tax payments. Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the cross-objection was disposed of accordingly.

This judgment highlights the importance of demonstrating reasonable cause for failures in tax compliance and the Tribunal's discretion in waiving penalties based on justifications provided by the taxpayer.