9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in payment of Service Tax by the appellant, as assorted by the Revenue - Since interest is compensatory in character and the same is liable to be paid, only when there is delay in payment of tax, and in this case, admittedly, there is no delay, no interest can be demanded from the appellant. Penalty u/s 78 - Held that: - since the appellant had deposited the service tax before the due date, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lity of ₹ 11,54,072/- was identified as payable by the appellant. Such liability was accepted by the appellant and it was submitted before the Departmental authorities that such liability can be adjusted against the advance tax deposited by it on 29.03.2013. However, the Audit Officers informed the appellant to take such advance tax as Cenvat credit and to reverse the Service Tax liability f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals) vide the impugned order dated 26.09.2017 has upheld the interest and the penalty under Section 78 of the Act. The Service Tax demand was also appropriated from the amount already deposited by the appellant on 29.03.2013. 2. The ld. Consultant appearing for the appellant submits that since the disputed period is from April to August 2013, the service tax, as per the statutory provisions, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posited the Service Tax in advance on 29.03.2013. Thus, it is evident that there was no delay in payment of Service Tax by the appellant, as assorted by the Revenue. Since interest is compensatory in character and the same is liable to be paid, only when there is delay in payment of tax, and in this case, admittedly, there is no delay, no interest can be demanded from the appellant. 7. Further, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
