Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

V.S.C.V. Radhakrishnan Chettiyar & Sons, Geetha Yarn Traders, Sadhana Yarn Traders Versus Commissioner of C. Ex & Service Tax, Trichy

2016 (9) TMI 192 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Imposition of penalty - Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 – business auxiliary services – failure to submit list of records maintained - Rule 5(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 – SCN – Held that: - the show cause notice itself is vague in as much the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he returns and imposing penalty after a period of 10 years is not legally sustainable – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal Nos. ST/42018, 42021, 42020/2015 - Final Order No. 41079-41081/2016 - Dated:- 8-7-2016 - Shri P.K. Choudh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for disposal. 2. The issue relates to imposition of penalty under Section 77 (2) of the Finance Act. 3. All the three Appellants were registered with the service tax department and obtained Registration Certificates respectively in the year 2003 unde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

djudicating authority imposed a penalty ₹ 10,000/- on the appellants under Section 77 (2) of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 which was upheld by ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. Hence the present appeals. 4. Shri V. Alagappa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xplained their position, seeking cancellation of the registration certificate. He submits that issuance of show cause notice for want of records after 10 years is unsustainable. Even as per Rule 5(3) of Service Tax Rules, 1994, the appellants were no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rselvam, AC (AR) appeared for Revenue who reiterated the impugned order. 6. After hearing both sides, and on perusal of records, I find that the show cause notice itself is vague in as much there is no evidence on record that they have not submitted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version