9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Chandani Tanna, Advocate, for appellant Shri Suresh Murugu, Deputy Commissioner (AR), for respondent ORDER Per : S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 3.9.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise whereby the Commissioner has confirmed the demand of service tax of ₹ 1,27,60,369/- and also appropriated the same amount already paid by the appellant-assessee. The Commissioner has also confirmed the interest liability and also appropriated the interest already paid by the appellant-assessee and he has also imposed equal penalty under the second proviso to Section 78(1) of the Finance Act as the case may be, and also given liberty to pay 25% of the penalty imposed under Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he show cause notice and submitted that they have paid the entire service tax, interest and penalty as per the provisions of Section 73(4A) and therefore show cause notice should not be ab initio, but the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune confirmed the service tax and appropriated the same and ordered recovery of interest and appropriated the amount already paid. He also imposed penalty of ₹ 40,000/- under Section 77(2) and ₹ 10,000/- under Section 77(1)(a) and penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act. Further, the penalty of ₹ 18,75,418/- already paid by the appellant under Section 73(4A) was appropriated. The appellant also paid the balance penalty of ₹ 13,32,675/- and intimated the department that the entire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) Vinayaka Travels 2011 (23) STR 5 (Kar.); (iii) Continental Foundation Jt. Venture 2007 (216) ELT 177 (SC). 5. On the other hand, learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, we find that during the investigation the appellant paid the entire service tax along with interest and also penalty of ₹ 18,75,418/- under Section 73(4A). Since the entire tax liability along with interest and penalty has been paid during the investigation and before the show cause notice, thereafter under Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, the Revenue should not have issued the show cause notice because the Revenue has not been able to bring ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
