9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ale of Space or Time for Advertisement” levied for the first time with effect from 01.5.2006. On receiving a categorical opinion of non-applicability of Service Tax, they did not discharge the Service Tax. However, subsequently, on further inquiry from other sources/consultants they realized their mistake and discharged the entire amount of Service Tax alongwith interest on 05.7.2007 pertaining to the period of 01.5.2006 to 30.6.2007. Their Claim is that this argument even though advanced before the authorities below, but not considered. I find that undisputedly, the appellant is a public sector undertaking and also the amount of Service Tax due for the period of 01.5.2006 to 30.6.2007 has been paid by them after realization of the fact th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that Service Tax is not applicable to public sector undertakings, no Service Tax was paid by the appellant. Consequently, on realization of mistake, the appellant paid the entire amount of Service Tax of ₹ 40,55,589/- with interest of ₹ 2,22,869/- on 5.7.2007 for the period 1.5.2006 to 30.6.2007 and registered with the Central Excise Dept. Consequently, a show cause cum demand notice issued to them on 23.1.2008 proposing penalty and appropriation of the amount paid by them. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed and penalty under Sec.76 and also penalty under Sec. 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 imposed. Aggrieved by the said order, imposition of penalty, the appellant filed an appeal before the Ld Commissioner (Appeals), who in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Jallender - 2008(229)ELT 557 (Tri.Del) later upheld by the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court reported as 2009(243)ELT A91(P H). It is also his contention that the Service Tax liability was discharged within the normal period of limitation on realization of the mistake. Therefore, the authorities below ought to have invoked Sec. 80 of Finance Act, 1994, as they had demonstrated reasonable cause for failure to discharge their Service Tax liability soon after the introduction of the new levy on the services rendered by them. In support, the Ld Advocate referred to the Hon ble Gujarat High Court judgment in the case of CCE C Vs Port Officer - 2010(19)STR.641 (Guj). The Ld AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Ld Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
