TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) Shri Prakash Mehta, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Raja Dass, Authorised Representative, for the Respondent. [Order per : T. K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - These appeals, have been filed against the following Orders-in-Appeal passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-II), Bangalore. 2. The details of the appeals are given in the following tabular column. Sl. No. Appellant/Respondent Orders-in-Appeal No. Service Tax demanded Penalties Imposed 1. M/s. AK I Advertising Pvt. Ltd. V. CCE, Bangalore 33/2007 dated31-7-2007 Nil Rs. 200/- per day or 2% of Service tax per month which ever is higher u/s 76, Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals) has given a very exhaustive order. He has distinguished all the case laws cited by the appellants and stated that even during the amnesty scheme as the appellants had not paid the service tax on the entire value, there was suppression. Therefore, penalty is leviable. Taking that view he has upheld the Orders-in-Original levying the various penalties. 6. The learned Departmental Representative in this connection brought to our notice the decision of the High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner-III v. M/s. Kennametal Widia India Ltd. - 2008-TIOL-169-HC-KAR-CX wherein the Hon'ble High Court has set aside the Tribunal's order and held that interest is leviable even when the short payment was made even before the issue o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration of the issue, we find that with regard to the levy of penalty as well as demand of interest, there are conflicting decisions of the Tribunal and the High Court. Therefore, we are of the view that each case has to be decided on the facts and circumstances of the case. In the present appeal, it is seen that even during the amnesty scheme certain values had been suppressed and later when the Department pointed out that the appellants had short paid the service tax, they paid the tax demanded along with interest even before the issue of Show Cause Notice. Both circulars dated 3-10-2007 are cited. The same is reproduced below. F. No. 137/167/2006-CX.4 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n and other person to whom notices are served under sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be concluded." Thus, law prescribes conclusion of proceedings against such person to whom SCN is issued under sub-section (1) of section 73. Therefore, it is not merely a conclusion under sub-section (1), but conclusion of all proceeding against such person. Similar is the position in respect of sub-section (3) of section 73. 4. Accordingly, conclusion of proceeding in terms of sub-section (1A) and (3) of section 73 implies conclusion of entire proceedings under the Finance Act, 1994. (Gautam Bhattacharya) Commissioner (ST) 9. In terms of the above circular which has only clarified various provisions of the Finance Act, even in cases of wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
