Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Visranthi Builders Versus Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, The Commissioner of Central Excise

2015 (6) TMI 697 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Penalty u/s 76 - Whether Sections 76 and 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended warrant levy of penalty equal to amount of Service Tax by way of mandatory condition or any discretion is left with the authorities for imposing such penalty - Held that:- This is a case of deliberate suppression of facts with a willful intention to evade payment of Service Tax and the evasion would not have come to light but for the investigation conducted by the Officers. On a revision, the Commissioner (Appeals) i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sion in the case of Dhandayuthapani Canteen - Vs - Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [2015 (1) TMI 812 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] followed - Decided against assessee. - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3418 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009 - Dated:- 4-6-2015 - R. Sudhakar And K. B. K. Vasuki,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. S. Muthuvenkataraman For the Respondent : Mr. Chandrasekaran JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. Sudhakar,J.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the assess .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

follows: The appellant/assessee is engaged in the business of construction of residential flats for and on behalf of their clients, classifiable as construction of Residential Complex Service . They had neither registered themselves with the Department nor paid Service Tax on the value of the taxable service rendered by them. Hence show cause notice was issued for the purpose of recovery of service tax due, as the appellant had contravened the provisions of Section 68 of the Finance Act 1994 re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

se notice. 3. The said order of the Adjudicating Authority was revised by the Commissioner of Central Excise holding that since the assessee had failed to pay service tax due on the value of the taxable service rendered by them, they were liable to pay penalty and hence imposed penalty of ₹ 200/- per day in respect of service tax payable during the period from 16.6.2005 to 17.4.2006 under the provisions of Section 76 of the Finance Act, penalty of 2% per month in respect of the tax payable .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e finding of the adjudicating authority that the assessee was guilty of suppression remains unchallenged. Once suppression is established, penalty is automatically attracted, in the light of the apex court decision in Union of India Vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors reported in 2008 (231) ELT.3 (S.C.)]. I, therefore, agree with the finding of the Commissioner that penalty is to be imposed, uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the appellant/a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version