9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Dhaval Shah (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that as per the provisions of Rule 6(4A) and 6(4B) of the Service Tax Rues, 1994, appellant can adjust the excess service tax paid for discharge of service tax for the further months/ quarters. It is his submission that the amount involved in the present proceedings was less than one lakh, therefore, the adjustment was proper as per the provisions of Rule 6 (4A) and 6 (4B) even if done after a period of one year. As regards the penalties, learned advocate argued during the hearing that appellant has adjusted their won money and no penalty under Section 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 can be imposed. He relied upon the case of Siemens Limited vs. CCE, Pondicherry- 2013 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amely; (i) excess amount paid is on account of reasons not involving interpretation of law, taxability, classification, valuation or applicability of any exemption notification. (ii) excess amount paid by an assessee registered under sub-rule (2) of Rule 4, on account of delayed receipt of details of payments towards taxable services may be adjusted without monetary limit. (iii) in case other than specified in clause (ii) above, the excess amount paid may be adjusted with a monetary limit of one lakh rupees for a relevant month or quarter as the case may be. (iv) the details and reasons for such adjustment shall be intimated to the jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise within a period of fifteen days from the date of such adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts and circumstances of the present case. Confirmation of demand and interest has been correctly made by the first appellate authority which needs to be upheld. 5. So far as imposition of penalties under Section 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 is concerned, it is observed that appellant has a bonafide belief that it was their own money and they are entitled to adjust the excess amounts paid. Under these circumstances there cannot be any malafide on the part of the appellant. Accordingly, I set aside the penalties imposed upon the appellant under Section 76 and 77 read with Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. 6. Stay and appeal filed by the appellant is rejected, except the penalties imposed upon the appellant under Section 76 and 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
