9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant, there is no suppression of facts or falsification statement of account (s) is made out - penalty not warranted. Penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - APPEAL No.ST/70182/2015-ST[SM] - A/71012/2018-SM[BR] - Dated:- 19-4-2018 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri S.A. Khan, Consultant Shri G.S. Bisht, Advocate for Appellant Shri Gyanendra Kr. Tripathi, Asstt Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The appellant M/s Indian Security Guard Services is in appeal against Order-in-Appeal dated 24.09.2015, confirming the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a provider of Security Agency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 25,47,434/- as short paid, with proposal to appropriate ₹ 11,75,872/- already deposited, with further proposal to impose penalty under Section 78 77 of the Act. The said show cause notice was adjudicated vide Order-in-Original dated 15.05.2014 on contest, wherein the appellant had stated that they have disclosed their proper taxable receipts and admitted liability of service tax truly with the Department and as such the provisions of Section 78 is not attracted. Moreover, they were prevented from depositing the tax due to shortage of fund and there being no malafide intention. It is admitted case that there is no concealment of any taxable receipt. The short payment of service tax, is due to shortage of funds. So far penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heard the learned A.R. for revenue who has supported the impugned order. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the appellant had admittedly deposited ₹ 11,75,872/- before the issuance of show cause notice. Further, it is admitted facts that the tax short paid is part of the admitted tax not deposited as per the ST-3 returns, filed by the appellant, though belatedly. Further, I find that the appellant has taken care to deposit the tax in arrears before the passing of the adjudication order. The appellant further states that they have deposited the amount of interest payable for late payment of tax of ₹ 2,50,150/-on 28th June, 2014, ₹ 2,10,070/- on 28th June, 2014 ₹ 4,55,100/- on 29th Jun, 2014, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
