Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 766 - CESTAT NEW DELHIExtended period of limitation - proviso to Section 73 (1) of Finance Act - imposition of penalty u/s 78 - HELD THAT:- It is found that the appellant has taken suo moto registration after being pointing out by the service receiver. It is only after they suo moto complied, it was found that they have not deposited the tax for earlier period though it was payable - Further, the admitted facts is that the appellants were under the belief that they are not liable for tax nor they were so advised by the service receiver, M/s. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. nor they have been approached by the Department about their liability to pay tax in the earlier point of time. It is also admitted fact that they have not charged the service tax from the service receiver, nor they have collected with any bills. Further, on being asked by the Department, they have approached the Hindustan Zinc Ltd. and again deposited the tax substantially - there is no case of any suppression or mis-statement of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of the Act or Rules made out against the appellant. Neither the extended period of limitation is available to the Revenue nor imposition of penalty under Section 78 is justified - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|