Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (6) TMI 729

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d, longer limitation has been correctly invoked. Waiver of penalty - section 80 - Held that:- Commissioner (Appeals) invoking Section 80 has already reduced the penalty under section 76 & 78 of ₹ 50,000/- each on the ground that as the service tax is comparatively new levy the appellant may not be aware of service tax Rule and Regulations - Since the Commissioner (Appeals) has given a finding that the Appellant may not be aware of service tax rules and regulation, his decision to retain even reduced penalty under section 76 and 78 being not compatible with this finding, is not correct. Therefore the penalty under section 76 & 78 is set aside. - Decided partly in favor of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/19/2009 CU[DB] - FINAL ORDER NO:- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nder section 76, 77 78 ibid. On appeal being filed to the Commissioner (Appeals), against this order, the Commissioner (Appeals), vide order-in-appeal dt. 23.02.07, while upholding the service tax demand of Rs.1,03,819/- along with interest, invoking Section 80, reduced the penalty imposed under section 76 as well as 78 to Rs. 50,000/- each, and totally waived the penalty imposed under section 77. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal has been filed. 2. None appeared for the appellant. However, there is Written submission filed by the counsel of the Appellant requesting for decision of the matter on the basis of the Written Submissions 3. Sh. Goving Dixit, the learned DR, defended the impugned order by reiter .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat in view of this, in the present case failure of the appellant to file the return or disclose his activity by any other means is sufficient for invoking extended limitation period under section 73(1)(a) and that in view of this the contention of the appellant that there was no intention on their part to evade the tax and hence longer limitation period is not invokable, is not correct. He, therefore, pleaded that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. 4. We have gone through the Written submissions filed by the appellant and have also considered the submissions of the learned DR. The appellant are a Direct Marketing Agent for ICICI Bank for marketing of their car loans etc. and there is no dispute that this service is covered by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ding that there has been no omission or failure as mentioned in clause (a) on the part of the assessee, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or, as the case may be, Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise has in consequence of information in his possession, reason to believe that the value of any taxable service assessable in any prescribed period has escaped assessment or has been under-assessed or service tax has been paid or has been short-paid or any sum has erroneously been refunded he may, in cases falling under clause (a), at any time within five years, and in cases falling under clause (b), at any time within one year, from the relevant date, serve notice on the person chargeable with the service tax which has escaped asses .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the rule made there under with intent to evade tax was not necessary and what was required was reason to believe on the part of the Assistant./Deputy Commissioner that on account of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to file return under section 70 for any prescribed period or to disclose wholly or truly all the material facts required for verification of assessment under section 71, some value of the taxable service has escaped assessment or has been under-assessed or service tax has not been paid or has been short-paid or any sum has erroneously been refunded. In this case during the period of dispute the appellant were not filing any return and had not even taken any registration and hence in terms of the section 73(1)(a) a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates