9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, question of imposition of penalty on service tax of ₹ 25,54,666/- does not arise - Further, in respect of short payment of ₹ 6,40,460/-, matter remanded back to the Original Authority with a direction to examine whether excess paid amount of ₹ 11,62,889/- was paid before the due date of payment of service tax amounting to ₹ 6,40,460/- and if yes then in that event the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax (Appeals), Lucknow. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants were issued with a show cause notice on two grounds, one was short paid service tax on Renting of Immovable Property Services and another was short paid service tax of ₹ 6,40,460/- on construction of Residential Complex Service . The proceedings culminated into the passing of impugned Order-in-Appeal. In Par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to pay penalty amount, 25% of the entire amount of ₹ 31,95,126/- (25,54,666+6,04,460) under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1944. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the Learned Counsel for appellant, he has submitted that interest on delayed payment in respect of Renting of Immovable Property Service was paid before issue of show cause notice. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax of ₹ 25,54,666/- does not arise. I, therefore, set aside the order in so far as it relates to imposition of 25% penalty under Section 78 on alleged short payment of service tax of ₹ 25,54,666/- on Renting of Immovable Property . Further, in respect of short payment of ₹ 6,40,460/-, I remand the matter back to the Original Authority with a direction to examine whether excess p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
