9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ants are going to get extra benefit on account suppression. Therefore penalty u/s 78 is not sustainable. In favour of assessee - ST/84/2012 - FINAL ORDER NO.878/12 - Dated:- 7-8-2012 - Ashok Jindal, J. Appellant Rep by: Shri M.N. Bharathi, Adv. Respondent Rep by: Shri Parmod Kumar, SDR Per: Ashok Jindal: Heard both sides. 2. By way of this appeal, the appellants are challenging only the imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturer and exporter. During the course of their manufacture and export activity, they have taken the services of Goods Transport Agency and paid commission to overseas service provider. The appellant did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relies on the Tribunal's decision in Amman Steel Corporation Vs. CCE, Trichy - Vide Final Order No.277/2011 dated 1.2.2011. In view of these submissions, it is prayed that penalty under Section 78 be waived. 4. On the other hand, learned AR contended that both the lower authorities have given clear finding in the impugned orders that the appellants have suppressed the material fact from the Department and if at all investigation could not be conducted the evasion of tax could not be found out. It is further submitted that the appellants are having service tax registration and that they are dealing with excisable as well as taxable services, they must know the law clearly. As they did not pay the service tax on GTA and commission paid abro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... corporate established, or a partnership firm registered, by or under any law, any person who pays or is liable to pay freight either himself or through his agent for the transportation of such goods by road in a goods carriage In other words, the service tax was payable not necessarily only by the service provider unlike in most of the other services. Further, in the initial stages there were disputes relating to as to who shall pay the service tax on GTA services. In these circumstances and in view of multiplicity of persons out of whom one of them was required to pay service tax, the claim of the appellants that they were in the bona fide belief that they were not required to pay service tax and there was no deliberate intention on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
