2017 (12) TMI 168 - AT - Service Tax

Simultaneous penalty u/s 76 and 78 - case of appellant is that the penal provisions have been amended w.e.f. 10.05.2008 and the show cause notice in the present case has been issued on 23.06.2009 - Held that - Tribunal in the case of Ramawat Construction Company 2017 (5) TMI 705 - CESTAT NEW DELHI examined the identical dispute and concluded that the penalty would be liable as per the provisions at the time of offence and not at the time of issuance of notice - the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 76 cannot be questioned on this legal point - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Imposition of penalty under Section 76 when penalty under Section 78 was also imposed.

Analysis:
The appeal in this case was against the order of the Commissioner (Adjudication), Service Tax, New Delhi, regarding the liability of the appellants for service tax in the provision of "Commercial Training and Coaching" services. The Original Authority confirmed a service tax liability of &8377; 34,99,204/- and imposed penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

The appellant contested the imposition of simultaneous penalty under Section 76, citing amendments in penal provisions and relying on various decided cases. The appellant argued that after the amendment of Section 78 on 10.05.2008, no penalty could be imposed under both Section 76 and Section 78 in the same case. The appellant referenced decisions of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, along with other Tribunal decisions supporting their stance.

The respondent contested the appellant's submissions on the penalty imposition under Section 76 when a penalty under Section 78 was also imposed. The respondent referred to a recent Tribunal decision in a similar case and highlighted that the penalty would be applicable as per the provisions at the time of the offense, not at the time of notice issuance.

After hearing both parties and examining the records, the Tribunal focused on the specific issue of whether the appellant could be penalized under Section 76 when a penalty under Section 78 was already imposed. The Tribunal cited a previous case and the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision, emphasizing that the liability for any violation of law is governed by the law applicable at the time of the violation. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that the penalty imposed under Section 76 could not be questioned based on the legal point raised by the appellant, as per the legal position upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Therefore, based on the legal analysis and precedents cited, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it accordingly.

[Order pronounced on 27.10.2017]