9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1090X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar - October, 2007 to March, 2008, it was noticed that the appellant has not paid Service tax due in respect of all the above services; that accordingly, a SCN dated 24-7-2008 was issued directing the appellant to show cause as to why total Service tax amount of Rs. 3,22,543/- payable during the said period should not be demanded under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred as the Act), penalty should not be imposed under Section 76 of the Act and interest should not be demanded under Section 75 of the Act; that on adjudication, the Service tax amount paid subsequent to issuance of SCN was confirmed and adjusted along with interest, besides imposing equal penalty. 2. Being aggrieved by the above order, the appellant has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssociates v. CCE - 2008 (10) S.T.R. 130 (Tribunal) (f) J. K. D. Popat Co. v. CCE - 2008 (9) S.T.R. 541 (Tribunal); (vi) that the Assistant Commissioner has not explained as to how and why he has imposed equal penalty when Section 76 provides for penalty of Rs. 200/- per day or 2% per month of the Service tax paid late whichever is higher; (vii) that the total days of delay are 325 days and as per 2% per month on the amount defaulted, comes to Rs. 66,660/- and for the penalty of Rs. 200/- per day which comes to Rs. 65,000/- and hence on this ground also, the imposition of penalty is not sustainable. 3. PH was held on 6-7-2009 at 02.00 PM. Shri V.B. Gaikawad, Advocate, duly authorized by the appellant appeared before me at 02.00 PM. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ords, the penalty is imposable for late payment which cannot be under dispute and if the sufficient cause is shown for late payment, the discretion is also available to the adjudicating authority for waiver of penalty in terms of Section 80 of the Act. But in the instant case, no sufficient/reasonable reason has been put forth by the appellant. As rightly held by the lower authority, non-availability/insufficient funds cannot be stated as the reason for making late payments. Under the above circumstances, there cannot be full waiver of penalty. However, as contended by the appellant, the lower authority has not disclosed the base for arriving at penalty of Rs. 3,22,543/- which is equal to the Service tax. According to the appellant, penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
