9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d repair of refractory part of furnaces, boiler etc. as well as installation of refractory in coke-oven furnace etc. The Department initiated proceedings against the Appellant on the ground that they are engaged in the service of management, maintenance and repair falling under Clause:(zzg) and also engaged in the service of erection, commissioning and installation falling under Clause:(zzd), of Section 65(105) of the Finance Act, 1994 respectively. Accordingly, a show cause-cum-demand notice was issued and there was a proposal for penal action against the Appellant. The lower Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of Service Tax of Rs.3,67,389/-; however, he did not impose any penalty against the Appellant. Revenue challenged the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gement of the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Machino Montell reported in 2006(4) STR 177(P&H). 6. In his rejoinder, learned Chartered Accountant appearing for the Appellant submitted that they took the registration on 12.04.2007 and when the Officers of Service Tax Intelligence Department visited their premises, they handed over all the documents to them and they were not having any intention not to evade the tax liability in case of Rs.1,63,873/-. The contention is that they did not receive the amount from their clients and they paid the said amount and all other amounts to the Department the total dues along with the interest to the Department. 7. I have considered the submissions and perused the reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant s plea that they are not liable for penalty under Section 76 in view of the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, is acceptable. Section 80 provides as under: SECTION 80. Penalty not to be imposed in certain cases. Notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of section 76, [section 77 or section 78], no penalty shall be imposable on the assessee for any failure referred to in the said provisions if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure. 8. In these circumstances, the penalty is not imposable in view of the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, the learned Commissioner (Appeals ) Order is not sustainable. Accordingly, the same is set asi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
