9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1258X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir service tax liability could very well have been due to ignorance of the liability or bonafide confusion concerting the taxing provisions or a combination of both but certainly not with intent, by suppression or concealment - The benefit of doubt must be extended to the appellant - reasonable cause for the failure on the part of the assessee in discharging their duty liability - this is a fit case for invocation of the provisions of Section 80 of the Act and revoke the penalties imposed. The Commissioner has merely observed that the appellant failed to pay service tax in accordance with the provision of Finance Act, 1944, and a penalty u/s 76 is liable to be imposed - But, in other appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) had discussed in detai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... levant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the business of providing matrimonial service through their portals/web sites. By show cause notice dt. 7.7.04, service tax was demanded for the period from Oct 01 to May 04 of Rs.60,72,781/- classifying the service under the category of "online information and database access and or retrieval service". The original authority confirmed the demand of tax along with interest and imposed penalties under Section 75A, 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeals) extended cum tax benefit and modified the demand to the tune of Rs.56,57,756/- and set aside penalties except Section 75A penalty for non-registration. Aggrieved by the order of Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in other appeal as under:- "In the present case, the issue involved is purely that of interpretation of the legal provisions. It is also amply clear from the contents levelled in the notice that the present case is not covered by any precedence and the Board's clarification dated 9.7.2001 refers to dotcom companies like "Taxindiaonline.com who charge the customer for certain specific information contained in their website in advance or credit basis and invariably such "retrieval/access to information"used for commercial purpose etc. In the present case, the information retrieved/accessed is for the purpose of finding a suitable partner to enter into a matrimonial alliance unlike the examples given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e same by not passing it on to the exchequer. I am also convinced that reasonable cause for the failure on the part of the assessee in discharging their duty liability, and as such this is a fit case for invocation of the provisions of Section 80 of the Act and revoke the penalties imposed." 6. On the other hand, in appeal No.ST/180/06, the Commissioner has merely observed that the appellant failed to pay service tax in accordance with the provision of Finance Act, 1944, and a penalty under Section 76 is liable to be imposed. But, in other appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) had discussed in detail for invoking Section 80 of the Act, as mentioned above. We find that finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) is proper and reasonable. We also notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
