9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 860X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hased from the telephone service provider was a seriously contested issue before the Higher Judicial Forum at the relevant time and hence, there was reason to believe that the respondent Assessee bona fide believed that the same was not payable. Also, we do not find from the material on record that the registration of the respondent Assessee to service tax in the year 2004 is referrable only to the sale of recharge vouchers/coupons and not to anything else - section 80 rightly invoked. Penalty rightly set aside - appeal dismissed - decided in favor of respondent-assessee. - Central Excise Appeal No. 2 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 12-7-2016 - SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ. Mr. Sharad Bhattad and Mr. Kunal Nalamwar, couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent Assessee would not be required to pay the penalty. The order of the Tribunal so far as it rejects the appeal of the appellant Department against the imposition of the penalty, is challenged in the present appeal. 3. On hearing the learned counsel for the appellant Department and on a perusal of the orders, we find that there is no scope for interference with the order of the Tribunal in this appeal. The respondent Assessee had discharged the entire services tax liability of about rupees nineteen lakhs, after the show cause notice was served on it and the same is appropriated by the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal found that the discharge of service tax liability on the sale of recharge coupons/vouchers from the telephone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11. Admittedly, the relevant period, during which the respondent Assessee did not pay the service tax, is 2003 to 2008. A Clear finding of fact has been recorded by the Tribunal that the sale of recharge coupons/vouchers purchased from the telephone service provider was a seriously contested issue before the Higher Judicial Forum at the relevant time and hence, there was reason to believe that the respondent Assessee bona fide believed that the same was not payable. Also, we do not find from the material on record that the registration of the respondent Assessee to service tax in the year 2004 is referrable only to the sale of recharge vouchers/coupons and not to anything else. We do not, therefore, find that the Tribunal committed any ille ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
