9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 944X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Rajeev Gupta, Commr. DR for the respondent. ORDER The challenge in the present appeal is to imposition of penalty of Rs. 1,36,83,810/- (Rs. One Crore Thirty Six Lakhs Eighty Three Thousands and Eight Hundred Ten Only) imposed upon the appellant in terms of the provisions of section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. As per the facts on record, the appellant is engaged in provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and, in fact, the same stands paid by them along with interest even prior to the issuance of the show cause notice. The challenge is only to the imposition of penalties. He further submits that it is correct that they were charging and collecting service tax from their clients but the same was not being deposited with the Revenue on account of financial difficulty being faced by them. By drawing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ports the order of Original Adjudicating Authority. 5. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. 6. There is no challenge to the confirmation of demand of service tax, which stands accepted by the appellant and stands deposited to a large extent, along with deposit of the interest. The only challenge is to imposition of penalty under Section 78. The appellant have a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liability to the Revenue, by taking a registration and filing ST-3 returns. The use of the amount collected by the appellant from their customers in the name of the service tax, instead of depositing the same with the Service Tax Department, clearly reflects upon the malafide intention of the assessee. In such a scenario, the provisions of Section 80 cannot be invoked, in as much as the said secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act, 1994. Similarly, in the case of Pandurang Travels Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise-Pune, reported in 2009 (15) S.TR. 567 (Tri.-Mumbai) it was held that charging of service tax from the clients and not depositing the same with the Revenue is a clear case of evasion of service tax in which case penalties imposed on the assessee would be sustainable. 8. In view of our foregoing discus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
