2018 (2) TMI 1117 - AT - Service Tax

Penalty u/s 78 - Erection, commissioning and installation services - short-payment of service tax - Held that - substantial amount of the service tax has been discharged prior to issuance of show cause notice - the penalty imposed in the present case is unwarranted - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Imposition of penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:
The case involved the appellants who provided erection, commissioning, and installation services and were registered with the Service Tax Department. Upon scrutiny, it was found that they had not paid service tax on the amount received for services rendered. A show cause notice was issued, leading to the original authority confirming the demand for service tax, interest, and penalties. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand but reduced the penalty from ?13,74,974 to ?7 lakhs. The appellants contested the penalty imposition before the Tribunal, arguing that they had paid the entire service tax and interest, with a substantial amount paid before the show cause notice. The Tribunal considered the facts and set aside the penalty, maintaining the service tax demand and interest. The decision was based on the view that the penalty imposed was unwarranted given the circumstances. Thus, the appeal was allowed, and the penalty under section 78 was set aside.

This judgment highlights the significance of timely payment of service tax and interest, as well as the impact on penalties under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. It underscores the importance of compliance with tax obligations and the potential consequences of non-compliance. The Tribunal's decision focused on the specific circumstances of the case, emphasizing the pre-show cause notice payments made by the appellants. By setting aside the penalty while upholding the service tax demand and interest, the Tribunal aimed to achieve a fair and just outcome based on the facts presented during the proceedings. The reference to a previous decision in a similar case added weight to the appellant's argument regarding penalty imposition. Overall, this judgment serves as a reminder of the legal principles governing tax liabilities and penalties, emphasizing the need for taxpayers to fulfill their obligations in a timely manner to avoid additional financial burdens.