9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 468X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equired to pay service tax and there was no deliberate intention – the demand of tax along with interest was upheld – the penalties were set aside after invoking Section 80 – Decided in favor of assesse. - ST/546/2012 - - - Dated:- 22-2-2013 - P K Das, J. For the Appellant : Shri M N Bharathi, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri KSVV Prasad, Jt. Commissioner (AR) PER : P K Das The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture and export of textile made-up articles. The Central Excise Officers during the visit at the appellant's premises in 2008 noticed that the appellant was not paying service tax on GTA service. Thereafter, the appellant paid the entire amount of tax of Rs.55,832/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which is not acceptable. He submits that the appellant has not given reasonable cause for extending benefit under Section 80 of the Finance Act. He also submits that the appellants have not given reply to the show-cause notice. In this context, he relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Quality Welding Works Vs. CCE - 2011 (21) STR 187 (Tri. - Del.). 4. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, I find that the dispute relates to non-payment of service tax on GTA service for the period 1.1.2005 to 30.6.2008. It is seen that the appellants paid service tax along with interest immediately upon detection by the officers. On an identical issue, this Tribunal in the case of Amman Steel Corporation (Supra) set aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es 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 appellant that they were in the bona fide belief that they were not required to pay service tax and there was no deliberate intention on their part to evade the service tax, deserves to be accepted. On the officers' pointing out that as recipient of the GTA service who are paying the freight for such service tax, they were liable to pay the service tax, they have proved their bona fide by paying service tax along with interest promptly. In these circumstances, I deem it appropriate that the appellants who are dealers of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
