9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is totally unacceptable. Financial crunch is no circumstance can justify non-deposit of service tax collected. Obviously thus there is not a great deal of discussion required to conclude that the appellants deliberately short paid the service tax due and the impugned order does not suffer from any appealable infirmity on merit. The appellants during the hearing have pleaded that for penalty under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against Orders-in-Original No. 192-194/ST/PKJ/CCE/ADJ/2012 in terms of which the service tax demands (along with interest) and penalties were confirmed : 2. The facts briefly stated are as under: 3. During the investigation by DGCEI, it was revealed that the appellants were charging service tax from their customers for providing Security Agency Service and the amounts received by them were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f reduced (25%) of the mandatory equal penalty in terms of proviso to Section 78 of Finance Act. 5. The ld. AR stated that the appellants deliberately did not pay the service tax due in spite of having collected it and their appeals need to be dismissed. 6. We have considered the submissions. It is seen that the appellants have not denied that the impugned service tax was leviable and theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the impugned order. In this regard, we find that the Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad Vs. Ratnam Metals Ltd. - 2013-TIOL-1924-HC-Ahd-CX has held as under: At no stage, either in the Order-in-Original or in the order of Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee respondent has been given the benefit of payment of reduced penalty Court has followed a consistent view that the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals Nos. ST/55809/2013 and ST/55810/2013 relating to Show Cause Notices dated 10.4.2011 and 20.10.2011 are dismissed and appeal No. 55715/2013 relating to the Show Cause Notice dated 20.10.2009 is partially allowed only to the extent that the penalty of ₹ 8,15,44,386/- imposed under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994 will be reduced to 25% of the said amount provided the service tax and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
