9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ajay Tondon for the Appellant. A. K. Rastogi for the Respondent ORDER 1. Heard both sides and perused record. 2 . The appellant provides services relating to marketing, sale and promotion of pre-paid cellular connections. They also undertake recharge of SIM cards and providing of customer care services. The appellant had not taken registration or paid the service tax on the services provided. Therefore, Central Excise Authorities issued notice to the appellant. While so, the Central Government announced a scheme for registration of service tax providers and payment of tax in arrears, without penalty. The features of the scheme were published. A copy of the Trade Notice No. 2 of 2004, dated 22-9-2004 of Chennai, Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty was imposed on the appellant, for delay in taking registration and non-payment of tax on time. The appellant's contention before the lower authorities was that it was covered by the special scheme and therefore penalty was not attracted. This contention was rejected by the adjudicating and 1st Appellate Authority. The finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) may be read:- 'On the contrary, the adjudicating authority has observed that the party cannot be given benefit of immunity from penalty under the Extraordinary Tax Payer Friendly Scheme as the department has already started enquiry against them and only on asking by the department, they had submitted the detail of commissions received from RIL, as they have not approached the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants are liable to pay the penalties adjudged by the Adjudicating Authority which have been imposed as per law and thus require no interference at this level. In light of the foraging discussions findings, I uphold the impugned order and reject the instant appeal." 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the lower authorities were in error in imposing the penalty inasmuch as the scheme made no distinction between parties who sought registration on their own and the parties who took registration in the light of pending proceedings. 5. The scheme has been extracted under Paragraph '2'. A perusal of the scheme makes it clear that service providers were welcome to avail of the scheme irrespective of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
