TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edit and its utilization were duly reflected in their ST-3 returns filed with the Department periodically As decided in CCE & C, Daman vs. PSL Corrosion Control Services Ltd [2010 (3) TMI 784 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] & CST, Bangalore vs. Motor World [2012 (6) TMI 69 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] Section 80 stipulates that no penalty shall be imposable on an assessee under Sections 76, 77 or 78 ibid if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure. The Appellants have submitted that the lapse occurred due to their presumption that the adjustments of output service tax against input service tax is allowable, which has not been otherwise communicated to them by the Department. Hence, this is an appropriate case to invoke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed a penalty of Rs.3,93,054/- under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Respondent discharged the entire amount of service tax on GTA service (outward freight) for the said period later, through GAR-7 challan on 08.07.2009. However, they had filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) disputing the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed their appeal. Aggrieved by the said Order, the Revenue is in Appeal before this Tribunal. 4. Learned A.R. for the Revenue reiterated the Grounds of Appeal. He has further submitted that the Respondent had paid the entire amount of service tax on GTA service (outward freight) through GAR-7 challan, accepting their mis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said period, i.e.from April, 2007 to March, 2008. The amount of CENVAT Credit paid towards the GTA service (outward freight) is still lying with the Department and they had not claimed the refund of it, nor intended to do so. In the absence of any intention to evade or default in making payment of service tax, no penalty is imposable under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. In support, he has referred to the judgement of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CST, Bangalore vs. Motor World [2012(27) STR 225(Kar.) and also the judgement of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE C, Daman vs. PSL Corrosion Control Services Ltd. [2011(23) STR 116(Guj.). 6. Heard both sides and perused the record. The limited issue rai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stipulates that no penalty shall be imposable on an assessee under Sections 76, 77 or 78 ibid if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure. The Appellants have submitted that the lapse occurred due to their presumption that the adjustments of output service tax against input service tax is allowable, which has not been otherwise communicated to them by the Department. Moreover, the Appellants have owned up the liability and have already deposited the S.T. amount along with interest. The department is not able to establish on record that there was any intention to evade tax on the part of the Appellant who have adduced reasonable and sufficient cause for the failure on their part to pay the service tax. Since p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
