TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 739X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ability. Interest liability – Held that:- No intention to run away from the service tax liability and having deposited the same through the Cenvat account, the appellant has not retained any part of the government dues with him with intention to evade the same. Accordingly, the interest liability as confirmed by the lower authorities does not arise at all Penalty – Held that:- Appellant having discharged the service tax liability through Cenvat account - penalties imposed by the lower authorities set aside - ST/581 of 2011 - A/267/WZB/AHD/2012 & S/287/WZB/AHD of 2012 - Dated:- 24-2-2012 - M.V. RAVINDRAN, J. P.V. Sheth for the Appellant. J.S. Negi for the Respondent. ORDER 1. This stay petition is filed for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgments of the Tribunal squarely covers the issue in his favour. 1. Mohini Industries v. CCE [2009] 23 STT 466 (New Delhi - CESTAT). 2. CCE, C ST, Raigad v. Lakeland Chemicals (India) Ltd. [2010] 24 STT 243 (Mum. - CESTAT). 3. Pragathi Automation (P.) Ltd. v. CST [Stay order No. 1198 of 2008, dated 10-12-2008]. 4. Modipon Ltd. v. CCE [Stay order No. 9 of 2010-SM(BR)(PB), dated 21-12-2009]. 5. CCE v. Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. 35 STT 391 (Punj. Har.). 6. CCE v. Vulcan Gears [2009] 23 STT 472 (Ahd. - CESTAT). 7. CCE v. Nova Petrochemicals Ltd. [Order Nos. A/2246 - 2249/WZB/AHD/2011, dated 8-12-2011]. 5. It is his submission that the demand of the service tax liability be set aside and appeals be all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 65 of the Finance Act, provided by the provider of taxable service, to a customer, client, subscriber, policy holder of any other person, as the case may be. And the expressions 'provider' and 'provided' shall be construed accordingly." 11. It may be seen from the above reproduced provisions of Rule 2(p) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 the output service has been defined categorically excluding the services of GTA services from 01.03.08 which would mean that though the liability to pay the service tax on the GTA services received is on the appellant, the said activity of discharging of service tax liability, from 01.04.08 will not be considered as an output service provided by the appellant. If that be so, the activity of the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he litigation. I also note that by reversing the Cenvat credit, the appellant was not retaining any money belonging to the Government and by payment in cash and reversal of debit entry, only procedural irregularity was rectified. The liability of interest had been prescribed where the appellant retains the money which may be due to be paid to the Government which is not the case here. I find considerable force in the argument advance by the learned Consultant, Strictly going by the law, interest may be due, but the fact remains that by reversing the Cenvat credit, the respondents had committed a procedural irregularity only and therefore reversal of the same and payment in cash would be sufficient. The question of penalty would arise depend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
