9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mposed on them under Sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and the same are hereby set aside - However provisions of Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994 gives relief from imposition of penalty in case of penalties imposed under Sections 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 only. Here the appellant has been penalized under Section 70 also, when they had delayed the filing of their half-yearly return contravening the relevant provisions of law of Service Tax. This penalty of ₹ 4000/- imposed under Section 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 on the appellant assessee does not deserve to be set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - ST/1401/2012-SM - Final Order No.22131 / 2015 - Dated:- 1-12-2015 - Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... states that as soon as the appellant came to know that service tax was payable on the supply of manpower service, even when the service was being provided to a 100% EOU, the said liability was honoured and service tax along with interest was immediately paid i.e. on 28/11/2006. He points out that however Department issued them a show-cause notice, inter-alia, for imposition of penalties under different sections of the Finance Act, 1994 though provisions of Section 73(3) of Finance Act, 1994 say that in case of erroneous, non-levy or short-payment, show-cause notice is not to be issued. The learned advocate for the appellant pleads that as they already paid the dues i.e. service tax and interest, the penalties imposed should be set aside in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocate argues that there have been enough reasonable causes in their case for failure to pay service tax. Therefore considering the provisions of Section 80, no penalty is imposable on them. 3.4. Learned advocate however accepts the appellant s liability of payment of service tax along with interest; he also says that though it was paid quite delayedly, there cannot be any escape on any ground for them to escape from the payment of this liability of service tax. 4. Learned AR Shri Ajay Saxena appearing for the Revenue argues that in this case, facts themselves indicate wilfull suppression, fraud etc. as the appellant did not pay service tax and were not vigilant enough to know and find out if their service is covered under Service Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
