9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 529X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority has confirmed the demand of interest. Penalty also has been imposed. The issue in a nutshell is that the appellant failed to pay service tax pertaining to the period June 2004 to March 2005 within the stipulated time frame. Hence, show cause notice was issued demanding interest and proposing penal action. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of ₹ 36,087/- under Section 75 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The learned advocate reiterated the grounds of appeal, and requested to allow appeal waiving the requirement of pre-deposit of penalties. 4.1 I have given careful consideration to the facts of the case, contentions put forth in the grounds of appeal and submissions made during the personal hearing. I am convinced that the appellant has made out a prima facie case for the waiver of pre-deposit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant also. Hence, penal action under Section 76 is justifiable. A close reading of Section 76 throws light to the fact that mere failure to pay tax would attract the provisions of this Section. It is not mandatory that the elements of suppression/intention to evade payment of duty should exist. Non-filing of return in time invites penal action under Section 77. However, I am of the considered view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been worked out purely based on the figures furnished by the appellant in the statutory returns. Further nothing is on record to prove to the contrary also. Hence I cannot take a different view than what the original authority has taken. Lastly I notice that they have got one more plea that the value should be treated as cum-tax value. I observe that proper consideration was not given to this ple ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
