9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit, the entire situation was revenue neutral as held in the various judgments cited by the appellant above. Therefore, the demand itself was not sustainable on time bar. However, since the appellant have paid service tax along with interest, the same is maintained. Since, there is no mala fide intention on the part of the appellant the ingredients required for imposing penalty under Section 78 do not exist. As regard the reliance placed by the Learned AR in case of UNION OF INDIA VERSUS M/S RAJASTHAN SPINNING WEAVING MILLS AND COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS M/S. LANCO INDUSTRIES LTD. [ 2009 (5) TMI 15 - SUPREME COURT] , it is found that the said judgment has held that once 11AC is applicable, the mandatory penalty of equ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as introduced only w.e.f. 28.05.2012 and the changes were rather new during the material period involved. The said Section through explanation provided for adopting Customs exchange rate for payment of service tax in the following manner: - 67A. Date of determination of rate of tax, value of taxable service and rate of exchange. The rate of service tax, value of a taxable service and rate of exchange, if any, shall be the rate of service tax or value of a taxable service or rate of exchange, as the case may be, in force or as applicable at the time when the taxable service has been provided or agreed to be provided. Explanation. For the purposes of this section, rate of exchange means the rate of exchange referred to in the Explanation to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3) GSTL 250(Tri-Hyd.) 3. Shri Anand Kumar, Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 3.1 He submits that since the demand was confirmed invoking extended period the mens rea is established and in such case the penalty is inevitable which neither can be reduced nor can be waved. He placed reliance on the Hon ble Supreme court Judgment in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajasthan Spinning Weaving Mills reported in 2009 (238) ELT 3 (SC). 4. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that the appellants have raised the issue of limitation only for dropping of penalty. However, they have paid the service tax along with interest and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
