9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice, the adjudicating authority should have brought to the notice of the appellant the option available for payment of 25% of tax demand as penalty under section 78 of Finance Act 1994 for final closure of the matter. Since this was not done by the lower authorities I follow the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of KP Pouches (P) Ltd. Vs UOI-[2008 (1) TMI 296 - HIGH COURT OF DEL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturns. The matter came to the notice of Revenue Department which investigated the matter and when the non-payment of tax collected was pointed out, the appellant paid entire amount of service tax amounting to Rs.6,05,730/- by installments ending with September 07 and also paid interest of Rs.1,65,602/- by challan dt. 8.1.2010. Subsequently, show cause notice was issued on 29.1.2010 demanding serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sis and that is the reason for not paying service tax. He submits that appellant spent most of his time as an engineer in U.S.A before coming into India and started consultancy work and there was some lapse in compliance of the service tax laws but as soon as the issue was pointed out, tax along with interest was paid and therefore no show cause notice should have been issued in view of the provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his is a case where the appellant had collected service tax from his customer and kept the money with him and did not file returns. This cannot be treated as a case, where benefit of leniency by waiving the total penalty imposed can be granted to the appellant. I am of the view that penalty imposed is sustainable. However, considering the fact that appellant had paid tax amount along with interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
