9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 976X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its delayed payment before the issue of SCN - In similar set of facts, in assessee's own case, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX Versus M/s ADECCO FLEXIONE WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS LTD. [2011 (9) TMI 114 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], has held that the Authority / Department should not serve any SCN and penalty under Section 76 of the Act, is not l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 5,48,38,111/- during the above mentioned period. Since the appellant had already paid the demanded interest amount of ₹ 18,10,433/- before the issuance of show-cause notice, its appropriation was also proposed in the show-cause notice. Penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 was also proposed. 2. In the adjudication proceedings, the adjudicating authority confirmed the deman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of the Commissioner. 5. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 6. The learned advocate submits that they are only contesting the penalty under Section 76 and are not contesting the interest which is already paid by them. Admittedly, the assessee had paid both the service tax and interest for its delayed payment before the issue of show-cause notice. In similar set of fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o initiate proceedings for recovery of penalty under Sec. 76 of the Act . 6.1 By following the above judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court, the order of Commissioner imposing penalty under Section 76 of Finance Act, 1994 is set aside and the appeal of the appellant is allowed. (Operative portion of the Order was pronounced in Open Court on 16/04/2018.) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
