TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice President [Order].-1. Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order in revision passed by Commissioner of Central Excise whereby the penalties imposed under Section 76 of Finance Act was enhanced to @ Rs.100/- per day for delay in payment of Service Tax. 3. The contention of the appellant is that the amount of Service Tax along with interest was paid even prior to issuance of show-cause notice. A show-cause notice was issued on 5.3.04 for imposition of penalties under Section 75, 75A, 76 and 77 of the Finance Act. The adjudicating authority after considering the explanation given by the appellant for non-deposit of tax with due dates imposed penalty of Rs.500/- under Section 75A of Act and pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scheme, it was provided that if the Service Tax defaulter paid Service Tax liability on or 30.10.04 they are not liable for any penal action. The appellant submitted that in the case of M/s Centrum Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, New Delhi vide Final Order No. 222/07-SM(BR) dated 5.10.06 [2007 (6) S.T.R. 254] the Tribunal set aside the penalty after taking into consideration the Tax Friendly Scheme. The contention is that in the present case as the assessee has shown reasonable cause for failure to deposit the tax of payment, therefore, is not liable for penalty. 7. The contention of the Revenue is that the provisions of Section 76 of the Finance Act are mandatory and the assessee is liable to pay Rs. 100/- per day during which the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... discharged Service Tax liability till 30.10.04 they are not liable for any penal liability. In the present case, the appellant paid the Service Tax prior to 2004 that too, with interest. I find that Section 80 of the Finance Act also provides that no penalty is imposable under Section 76 in case he proves that there was no reasonable cause for the said failure. In the present case, as the new levy was introduced in the year 2002 and the default was for the period 2002 to 2003, therefore, the appellant deserves a lenient view. Further, I find that the Tribunal in the case of M/s Centrum Travels Pvt. Ltd . (supra) after taking into consideration the Tax Friendly Scheme set aside the penalty. In view of the above decision and in view o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
