9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 587X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... how-cause notice, intimated the authorities for not issuing the show-cause notice. Once the payment of service tax and interest is made by the appellant assessee and the intimation is furnished to the authorities, then the authorities should not serve any notice under sub-section (3) of Section 73 in respect of amounts already paid - there was no case to initiate proceedings for imposition of penalties under various sections of the Act. The appellant is not liable to pay penalty. Extending the benefit of Section of 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, the penalties and late fines are set aside in entirety - appellant s liability to pay service tax and interest amount is upheld which already stands paid, is upheld - appeal allowed in part. - Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the notice M/s. KMMI Steel Pvt. Ltd., Bellary from their client M/s. Trident Minerals, Hospet during the period from March 2008 to May 2009 for the aforesaid services provided under the taxable service category of Mining of Mineral services, to be the taxable value in terms of Section 67(2) of the Finance Act, 1994; (iii) I confirm the demand of ₹ 93,45,509/- (Rupees Ninety Three Lakhs Forty Five Thousand Five Hundred and Nine only) being Service Tax of ₹ 90,73,310/- and Education Cess of ₹ 1,81,466/- and Secondary Higher Education Cess of ₹ 90,733/- on the taxable value of ₹ 7,56,10,911/- received by the noticee M/s. KMMI Steel Pvt. Ltd., Bellary from their client M/s. Trident Minerals, Hospet towar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rresponding receipts of value of taxable services and by contravention of the provisions of Section 68, Section 69 and Section 70 of the Finance Act, 1994; (viii) I impose penalty under Section 77(1)(a) of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended, for failure to obtain Service Tax Registration in terms of Section 69 of Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 4 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, to an extent of ₹ 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) or ₹ 200/- (Rupees Two Hundred only) per day during which such failure continued, whichever is higher, starting with the first day after the due date till the date of actual compliance; (ix) I impose penalty of ₹ 10,000/-under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended, for failure to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax on the aforesaid activity, they would have included the amount of service tax and collected from the recipient of the services, the recipient being an exporter of iron ore was eligible to claim refund of service tax so paid resulting in a revenue neutral situation. It is also not in dispute that the appellant assessee had not collected any amount of service tax from the service recipient. The learned Advocate has filed a synopsis and a compilation of various decisions in support of his arguments. 4. The learned departmental representative justified the impugned order and relied upon the decision of Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CC, Mangalore Vs. Jindal Vijayanagar Steel Ltd. as reported in 2017(346) ELT 378 (Kar.) in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cco Flexione Workforce Solution Ltd. [2012(26) STR 3 (Kar.)], (ii) CCE Vs. Galaxy Construction Pvt. Ltd. [2017(48) STR 37 (Bom.)]. 8. Regarding the case decision of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court as cited by the learned AR for the Department, we find that the facts of that case are entirely different inasmuch as in that case, there was a deliberate non-payment of duty and there was a positive evidence to show that goods were being clandestinely cleared in defiance of law which fact was not in dispute. In the present case, there is no positive evidence on record to show that the assessee did not deliberately pay service tax and therefore, the ratio of the aforesaid ruling of the Hon ble High Court is not applicable to the facts of the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
