9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Laghu Udyog Bharati v. UOI, the respondents were not liable to pay the tax or file returns - Commissioner is justified in vacating the penalty following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. v. CCE –appeal dismissed - S/136/05/MAS - 1300/07 - Dated:- 30-10-2007 - P. KARTHIKEYAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER ORDER 1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the respondents was decided demanding service tax etc. Before adjudication the tax due as per notice had been paid by the respondents. The show-cause notice was disposed of by demanding interest of Rs. 4,915 on the tax paid belatedly and imposing a penalty of Rs. 9,417 under section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 for the failure to pay service tax in time. A penalty of Rs. 1,000 was imposed on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessees who are liable to file return under section 70. Admittedly, the liability to file return is cast on the appellants only under section 71A. The class of persons who come under section 7l A is not brought under the net of section 73. The above being the position show-cause notices issued to the appellants invoking section 73 are not maintainable. (9) We therefore come to the conclusi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al filed by the revenue, the grounds taken are that the liability of the availers of GTO service to pay service tax thereon had been enacted through validation provisions contained in the Finance Act, 2001 and Finance Act, 2003. Therefore, the respondents were liable to pay the service tax demanded. It is submitted in the appeal that the Commissioner ought not have relied on the judgment of the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India 1999(112) ELT 365 / [2006] 4 STT 322 , the respondents were not liable to pay the tax or file returns. Their conduct was consistent with the interpretation of the legal provisions by the Apex Court and cannot be held to attract any penalty under the statute. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order and dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
