9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 994X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d paid the tax with interest as pointed out by the audit without disputing the same and have even paid the tax for the period even prior to 18.04.2006, which on the face of it is not payable. The Appellant was entitled for closure of dispute relating to the demand, under Sec 73(3) of the Act - penalties set aside - appeal allowed. - HON'BLE MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY (JUDICIAL) And HON'BLE MR. A.K. JYOTISHI, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Y. Sreenivasa Reddy, Advocate for the Appellant Shri M. Anukathir Surya, AR for the Respondent ORDER [ Order per : ANIL CHOUDHARY ] Heard the parties. 2. The issue involved in this Appeal is whether the Appellant has been rightly denied the benefit of closure under Sec 73(3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04.2010 was issued pursuant to audit alleging suppression and invoking extended period of limitation, demanding service tax of Rs.1,11,21,187/- along with interest and further penalty was proposed under Sec 77 78 of the Act. 6. Prior to issue of SCN, the Appellant had admitted the liability to payment of service tax under reverse charge basis and had also paid the same along with interest vide different challans which have also been mentioned in the SCN, informing vide letter dated 15.04.2010 to the Adjudicating Authority that they have deposited the tax with interest. However, there is small balance remaining of Rs.9,46,471/-, which they were ready to deposit within 3 to 4 days, in view of the weekend. The Appellant also prayed that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s required to further pay 25% of the service tax as penalty for closure, as there is case of wilful suppression under the facts and circumstances. 9. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that admittedly, transaction has been duly recorded in books of accounts maintained in the normal course of business. Further, as the Cenvat credit of the tax paid under reverse charge mechanism is available to the Appellant, as they are manufacturing dutiable goods as well as rendering dutiable services, there is no incentive to evade. Further, admittedly, Appellant had paid the tax with interest as pointed out by the audit without disputing the same and have even paid the tax for the period even prior to 18.04.2006, which on the face of it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
