9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax liability for the period 24/02/2009 cannot be held against them as an with intention to evade payment of tax as subsequently the appellant have discharged the service tax liability correctly at the application rate i.e. 12.26% - the lower authorities should not have issued any SCN to the appellant, who has discharged the service tax liability which was short-paid by them for the period 24/02/2009 to 28/02/2009 - penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee. - ST/621/2012 - A/86653/17/STB - Dated:- 8-3-2017 - Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Vinay Jain, Chartered Accountant for the appellant Shri Ahibaran, Additional Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and the interest and imposed equivalent amount of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 4. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that having discharged the entire service tax liability on being pointed out, provisions of Section 78 cannot be attracted, that too by invoking extended period of limitation as the show cause notice was issued to the appellant on 18/05/2011 while they discharged the entire tax liability for March 2009. 5. Learned Departmental Representative submits that the appellant being in the organized sector should have himself worked out the short-levy and discharged the same but did not do so and the ST-3 declarations were also not giving proper information as to the amounts on which tax liability ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terest; on his own ascertainment by the assessee or on being pointed out by an officer, then the said provision mandates for non-issuance of show cause notice. In the case in hand, we are of the considered view that the lower authorities should not have issued any show cause notice to the appellant, who has discharged the service tax liability which was short-paid by them for the period 24/02/2009 to 28/02/2009. Our view are fortified by the judgment of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax, LTU, Bangalore v. Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd 2012 (26) STR 3 (Kar.). 8. In view of the foregoing, in the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that the impugned order imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
