9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 902X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ration. Therefore, the appellant had made out a justifiable cause for non-discharge of service tax liability during the period in question, accordingly by invoking the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, the penalties imposed are set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant - Appeal No. ST/88649/13 - A/85094/16/SMB - Dated:- 22-12-2015 - M. V. Ravindran, Member (J) For the Appellants : Shri V.S. Awate, Adv. Shri S.B. Awate, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri A.B. Kulgod, Asst. Commr (AR) ORDER Per M. V. Ravindran This appeal filed by the appellant is directed against order-in-appeal No. AV(133)124/2013 dated 22.05.2013. 2. The appellant, Ahmednagar Cantonment Board is constituted under the Canton ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy, there is exemption from the payment of service tax. He relies upon the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Gadkari Rangayatan v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai II- 2014 (36) STR 155 (Tri-Mumbai) and that there cannot be any malafide intention on their part as they being a Government body. 5. Learned D.R. on the other hand would submit that appellant were aware of the fact that they have discharged the service tax liability as after the department started the proceedings they discharged the tax. It is also his submission that the appellant did not invoke the provisions of Section 80 before the first appellate authority. 6. On perusal of the records and on consideration of the submissions made by both sides, I find that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hority, that the appellant has sought leniency under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, for the first time this being the question of law and provisions of Section 80 being in statute appellant could take the plea before the appellate authority for the first time. I also find that it being undisputed that the appellant is an autonomous body, penalty imposed need not to be upheld is the ratio in the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Gadkari Rangayatan (supra) in paragraph 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 and the same is reproduced: 4.3 The next issue to be decided is whether the extended period of time invoked to confirm the duty demand can be sustained and whether the appellant can be charged with intention to evade payment of Service Tax? A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
