9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (10) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 28-2-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai by which he has upheld the order of the lower adjudicating authority and confirming the interest amount of Rs. 48,25,578/- M/s. Chennai Telephones under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 for the belated remittance of service tax for some of the months during the period from August, 1994 to September, 1998. 2. Appear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2000 and since it was a Central Government department, no interest can be charged from them for the alleged belated payments. He further submits that the impugned order may be set aside. 3. Appearing for the Revenue ld. DR Shri C. Mani reiterates the stand taken by the department vide their letter dated C/IV/TELE/2/68/0002-JC, dated 8-9-2003, and he submits that from the date of passing of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... belated payments. 5. We have considered the submissions made by both sides and find that during the period i.e. from 5-10-1994 to 14-10-1998 when the journal slips were issued it was a Department of Telecommunication Services which was a Central Government Department and in view of the Tribunal decision rendered in the case of G.M. Telecom BSNL v. CCE, Chandigarh reported in 2003 (160) E.L.T. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
