9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me for payment of service tax by recipients of GTO services for the aforesaid period – tax was paid within the period allowed by the Finance Act, 2003 as also that allowed by the SC in Gujarat Ambuja Cements case – penalty not justified - S/85/2005 - 914/2007 - Dated:- 26-7-2007 - Shri P. G. Chacko, Member (Judicial) [Order]-1. A demand of service tax was raised on the appellants by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evisional Authority) had imposed a similar penalty on that party under Section 76 of the Finance Act. In that case, the party had paid service tax with interest on 10.12.2001 and the original authority had not imposed any penalty on them. The revisional authority imposed the above penalty on the party, which was set aside in Final Order No. 190/2007 dated 2.3.2007.[2008 (8) S.T.R. 260 (Tribunal) P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce Act, 2003, refrained from imposing penalty on them. It was this part of the order of the Assistant Commissioner that was revised by the Commissioner in the impugned order, wherein the above penalty was imposed on the assessee. 3. After hearing both sides and considering their submissions, I observe that, in the impugned order, learned Commissioner proceeded on the wrong premise that the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rthermore the liability to pay interest or penalty outstanding amounts will arise only if the dues are not paid within the period of two weeks from the order passed by this court on 17th November 2003. In those cases in which the tax may have been paid but not refunded to the writ petitioners, for whatever reason, there is no question of levy of any interest or penalty at all." The appellants ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
