9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 826X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed or imposed under section 78. In such a situation, any element which would bar the provisions under section 73 (3) cannot be considered to have existed - Revenue did not deal with a situation where tax amount and interest amounts have been paid before issue of SCN. In the present case, payment made should have been accepted for final closure of the dispute - Since the appellant has not filed ST- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rendered by them. When the matter was pointed out during audit by the Excise department, the appellant paid service tax payable along with interest before issue of show cause notice. Thereafter show cause notice dt. 15.6.2004 was issued demanding service tax and interest payable for the period Oct 02 to March 04 already paid and proposing penalty under section 76 77 of Finance Act, 1994. On a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y under section 78 was not imposed. When there is no suppression or misstatement, section 73 (3) of Finance Act , 1994 should apply and since the appellant had already paid service tax along with interest before issue of SCN, no SCN should have been issued in this regard. He relies on the following decisions: (i) Saumya Mining Pvt. Ltd Vs. CCE 2012 (25) STR 150 (Tri-Del) (ii) CCE Vs. Sri Kodur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustained. He relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Trans (India) Shipping Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Chennai - 2005 (188) ELT 445 (Tri.-Chennai). He is also relying on Tribunal's decision in Singh Road Lines Vs CCE Allahabad - 2009 (13) STR 588 (Tri.-Del) 5. I have considered the submissions. I find that in this case there is no allegation of any suppression or misrepresentation in the SCN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
