9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed, registration with the department as advised by his Chartered Accountant. However, in the payment of Service tax for the period up to 31-3-2003, he committed default, which was noticed by the department, which led to issuance of a show cause notice. By the time this notice was issued, the party had paid up a major part of the tax. What remained to be paid was an amount of Rs. 9915/-. Apart from demanding this amount under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, the SCN proposed to levy interest under Section 75 on the entire amount of tax belatedly paid and also proposed to impose penalties on the assessee under Sections 76 and 77 of the Act. The demand of tax was not contested. The assessee s contest, in their reply to the SCN, was in resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... strength of the High Court s judgment in Tamil Nadu Khadi Village Industries Board v. CCE, 2001 (129) E.L.T. 36 (Mad.), wherein the benefit of SSI exemption, under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was allowed to the writ petitioner notwithstanding the fact that they had not claimed such a benefit before the lower authorities. As regards penalty, ld. counsel relies on the Tribunal s decision in the case of Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. v. CCE, 2003 (161) E.L.T. 285 (Tri. - Bang.), wherein it was held that, where duty was deposited before issuance of SCN, penalty was not imposable under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act or under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 3. I have carefully examined the submissions. It is not in dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt had virtually accepted his liability before the original authority in his very reply to the SCN. I have perused their reply. This reply was given by Sri Rajesh Bajaj expressly in his capacity as proprietor of M/s. Bootleggers Island. The original authority did not dispute this capacity of Sri Rajesh Bajaj. In other words, the fact that Sri Rajesh Bajaj was acting in his individual capacity as proprietor of Bootleggers Island is one which stood tacitly accepted by the adjudicating authority. If that be so, it is open to that authority to examine the question whether the benefit of Notification No. 7/2001, which granted exemption to that taxable service provided to a client by an individual professional videographer in relation to video- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
