9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 789X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was paying service tax on the GTA services received by them from 2004 onwards. During the audit of the appellant's records in the year 2007-2008, it was found that appellants had not paid service tax of Rs. 34,279/- during the year 2004-2005 and 2006-2007. When this was pointed out by the audit party of the department, appellants immediately paid the amount with interest in January 2008 itself. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the very fact that appellants had paid service tax more than Rs. 1.08 lakhs in 2004-2005 and more than Rs. 1,34,000/- during the year 2006-2007 would show that they would not have tried to avoid paying a small amount of Rs. 34,279/- and make themselves liable for payment of interest and penalty. He also relies upon the provisions of Section 73(3) of Finance Act, 1994 which provides that whene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I also find that according to provisions of Section 73(3) of Finance Act, 1994, even if the amount was ascertained by audit party, if the assessee pays the amount before issue of show cause notice, unless suppression/fraud/collusion to evade duty has been found no show cause notice could have been issued. After going through the records, I find that both the lower authorities have not given enoug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
