9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the period April 2006 to March, 2009 towards construction services and maintenance services. Show Cause Notices was issued asking the assessee to pay the interest amounting to Rs.2,43,087/- for delayed payment of Service Tax, imposition of penalty for such delays under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1944 and imposition of penalty under Rule 7C of the said Rules for delayed submission of the ST-3 Return. Adjudicating Authority confirmed the interest and imposed penalty of Rs . 10,000/- under Rule 7C of said Rules. He however dropped the penalty under Section 76 of the Act by exercising the powers vested in him under Section 80 of the said Act. Against this order, the Revenue filed an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), who held that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.R. appearing for the Revenue has submitted that for waiver of penalty financial crisis cannot be considered within the purview of expression "Reasonable cause" used under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 as held in Inma International Security Academy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai 2006 (1) S.T.R. 289 (Tri.-Chennai) and in case of Shayna Construction Vs. Commr . of Central Excise, Rajkot reported in 2010 (262) E.L.T. 1006 (Tri.- Ahmd .). He stated that during 2006-2009, the appellant has defaulted in filing the return in time and payment of service tax on the due date on a number of occasions. In view of these facts, he justified the view taken by the Commissioner( Appeals). 5. Heard both the sides and perused the records. Issue involved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exercising the discretion provided under Section 80 for waiver of penalty under Section 76 by the adjudicating authority. Accordingly, the revisionary order passed by the Commissioner to file appeal against the said order cannot be faulted with. I also find that the appellant could not show that he could not pay the tax on account of bona fide mistakes or under the impression that tax was not payable due to interpretation, and therefore they could not show that there existed reasonable cause. 6. I find that Commissioner (Appeals) has not quantified the penalty to be paid. He has also not considered Appellant's claims as to whether the appellant was eligible to the benefit of the provisions of Section 73(3) of the Act on the ground that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
