9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... do not find any force in the submission made by the appellant. I agree with the findings recorded by Commissioner (Appeals). - Decided against assessee. - ST/58727/2013-ST(SM) - - - Dated:- 9-9-2014 - Manmohan Singh, J. For the Appellant : Shri Kamal Gupta, C.A For the Respondent : Shri V P Batra , DR JUDGEMENT Per: Manmohan Singh: Shri Kamal Gupta, C.A., Counsel of M/s Japan Airlines International Co. Ltd. appeared on behalf of the appellant against the Order-in-Appeal No.24/ST/Appeal/DLH-IV/2013 dated 08.04.2013. 2. Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected their appeal and upheld the Order-in-Original. Adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original No. 41/2010-11 dated 31 ,03.2011 has confirmed the demand of inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervice tax for the months of April, 2005 to September, 2005 in time to the credit of the Central Government:- Month Service Tax paid in cash Due Date for payment of Service Tax Date when service tax paid No. of days by which tax deposited late Interest @ 13% (in Rs .) April, 2005 7844 05.05.05 15.06.05 41 115 May, 2005 2790 05.06.05 15.06.05 10 10 May, 2005 10660 05.06.05 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax and delay are of 41 days in month of April 2005 delay 61 days in month of May, 2005 delay of 10 days in month of May 2005 delay of 31 days in month of June, 2005 delay of 2 days in month of August, 2005 delay of 1 day in month of September, 2005 are very marginal. He submitted that penalty for continued delay in filling should be upheld and no justification for continued delay. 7. Heard both sides and examined the records. 8. I have gone through the facts of the case and the submissions made by both sides. The issue involved for consideration is very simple. There is delay involving 41 days, 10 days, 61 days and 31 days. Delays have continued over many months. Commissioner (Appeals) in his order-in-appeal in para 6 to 7 has right ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax continuously during the above period, as is evident from the chart given in the foregoing para 2 and the penalty had rightly been imposed on them in terms of provisions of Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, I do not see any legal infirmity in the impugned Order-in-Original so far as the confirmation and appropriation of above demand amount of interest and imposition of penalty of ₹ 14600 on the appellants, are concerned. 9. There are continuous delays. These cannot be said bonafide. I have also perused Tribunal's judgement in the case of same appellant. Delays were also referred. Such delayed cannot be continued and ignored. Penal action was rightly confirmed by adjudicating authority and approved by Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
