9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 572X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... calculated and paid the service tax liability and filed the service tax return voluntarily, although late - The benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 has to be given to the appellant as held by this Tribunal in the case of Varsana Ispat Ltd. v. CCE - Penalty waived. - ST/06/2009-Mum - A/607/2010-WZB/C-IV/SMB - Dated:- 29-9-2010 - Shri Ashok Jindal, JJ REPRESENTED BY : Shri Pradeep Korde, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri N.A. Sayyad, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The appellant has filed this appeal against the imposition of penalty under Section 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a practicing Civil Engineer (registered as Architect) since 2005 and was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of his contention he placed reliance on Maraketforce (Chennai) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax - 2007 (8) S.T.R. 175 (Tri. - Che.) wherein it was held that late payment not due to mala fide intention, penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 is not leviable. Further, he submitted that the appellant has paid the service tax before the issue of show-cause notice along with interest. 4. On the other hand the learned DR submitted that there is a delay of 500 days in payment of service tax and in filing of ST return, the lower authorities has rightly imposed the penalty under Section 76 on the appellant. He further submitted that in the case of B.L. Mantri Associates (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 781 (Tri. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Finance Act, 1994 has to be given to the appellant as held by this Tribunal in the case of Varsana Ispat Ltd. v. CCE, Rajkot - 2010 (19) S.T.R. 359 (Tri. - Ahmd.). The case law cited by the learned DR are not relevant to the facts and circumstances of the case as in the case of B.L. Mantri Associates (P) Ltd. (supra) the assessee was a Private Ltd. Company and he might be having sufficient staff to calculate the tax. Moreover, in that case the service tax liability was clearly spelt out in the invoice raised by the assessee. Hence, the facts of the case are not similar to the case before me. In this circumstance, benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act, is to be given to the appellant and penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
