TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1379X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant has made was advance payment of tax and not any excess payment as concluded by the adjudicating authority. The liability to pay the tax arose only in April 2009, but the payment was made in December 2008. Thus the payment made in December 2008, can only be an advance payment of tax and not an excess payment of tax. Even though this contention was raised before the adjudicating authority in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r-in-original NO.02/ST/SB/2012-13 dated 21/08/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, (TAR), Mumbai. 2. The appellant, M/s Varun Shipping Co. Ltd., are in the business of supplying tangible goods for use service and are registered accordingly. They had paid service tax amounting to Rs.1,26,80,302/- in the month of December 2008, even though in respect of the service rendered they had not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aged in Rule 6 (4B). Accordingly, service tax demand of Rs.1,26,80,302/- for the period April to September 2009 was confirmed along with interest thereon and a penalty @ Rs 200/- per day or @ 2% of tax payable per month whichever is higher, was imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. Apart from the above, a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 was also impose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayment. Similarly, when they received the consideration in April to September, 2009 they have adjusted this amount and in the said return also it was shown that the payment made in December 2008, has been adjusted against the liability for the period April to September, 2009. From the details given in the service tax returns it can be easily seen that the payment made by them was an advance tax. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ough this contention was raised before the adjudicating authority in the reply to the show-cause notice, the same has not been rebutted by the adjudicating authority in any manner. He has simply dismissed the appeal saying that it is only an afterthought to cover up their lapses in not intimating the excess payment of service tax to the service tax authorities. There was no need for the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
