9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 503X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in their books of account. As per their letter dated 18.12.2012, they have explained that since they were providing the service to SEZ which was subsequently converted into DTA but they were not aware of the suit of the service recipient from SEZ Unit, they were under bonafide belief that service provided from SEZ unit is not chargeable to Service Tax. Therefore the payment of Service Tax was es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant have paid the Service Tax along with interest on pointing out by the Audit and intimated to the department, regarding acceptence of the liability and payment thereof, Vide their Letter dated 18.12.2012. Thereafter a show cause notice was issued, proposing demand of Service Tax along with interest and penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand, appropriated the amount of Ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides and perusal of the records, I find that the limited issue to be decided by me is that whether the appellant is liable for penalty under Section 78 whether given facts and circumstance. I find that the appellant have recorded all the transa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in as per the provision of Section 73(3) finance Act, 1994. According to which the department was not supposed to issue any show cause notice to the appellant. Considering the overall facts and the provision of Section 73(3) I am of the view that the penalty under Section 78 was not warranted. 5. Accordingly, the penalty under Section 78 is set aside the demand of Service Tax and interest and pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
