9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lty under Section 80 is that they had financial difficulties on account of which they could not pay the service tax in time but this is not a sufficient ground because they have collected the service tax from their customers. In the past also, the appellant has committed default in payment of service tax in time. No doubt the appellant had some difficulties on the financial front but that cannot be the reason for non-payment of tax once they have collected from the customers - The Tribunal in the case of Triton Communications Pvt. Ltd. [2005 (7) TMI 595 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], has held that financial crisis is not a reasonable cause for failure to pay tax. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - ST/58/2009-DB; ST/59/2009-DB; ST/60 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r.LTU dated 13/01/2009 No.110/2008-Commr.LTU dated 8.12.2008 No.133/2008-Commr. LTU dated 8.12.2008 2. For the sake of convenience, the facts of appeal No.E/58/2009 are taken. The appellants are engaged in providing taxable service under the category of manpower recruitment or supply agency service as defined under Clause 68 of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994. On scrutiny of the records of the assessee, it was found that they have not discharged the service tax liability for the month of October 2008. Scrutiny of the records and bank statements, revealed that out of the total service tax liability of ₹ 6,06,44,152/- (including Education Cess and Secondary Higher Education ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... financial difficulties and thereafter, on issue of show-cause notice, the appellant has paid the service tax along with interest and he is only praying that the penalties imposed under Section 76 may be dropped by invoking the provision of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order and submitted that the assessee is a habitual offender as observed by the Commissioner by giving instances of delay in the past months also. He further submitted that in the present case, the appellants have collected the service tax but did not deposit the same in the Government treasury and therefore, when the appellant has collected the service tax and has retained the same with him then in that si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made, I find from the records that the appellant had failed to declare the correct taxability in the ST-3 return, suppressed the value of taxable services and also did not deposit tax collected from their customers into Government Treasury. In the case in hand, if the Department had not conducted the detailed investigation, the entire non-payment of tax would have gone unnoticed and escaped detection. Since appellant has collected the service tax but not deposited to the Government, I find that the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority and upheld by the First Appellate Authority are correct and there is no reason to interfere in such a reasoned order passed by the lower authority. 6.1 Further, we find that in the past also, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
