New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 741 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (9) TMI 741 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2017 (47) S.T.R. 50 (Tri. - Del.) - Levy of penalty - delayed payment of service tax - As per the appellant, the said service tax was not deposited as their customer had not given the tax amount and they were under the bonafide impression that if tax payment has not been paid by the customers, same need not be deposited. As soon as the Revenue pointed out that, they deposited the tax along with interest on 16.9.2008. - Held that:- Non-receipt of amount of se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

already observed that the benefit of said notification would be available to the assessee even if it has received free supply items from his clients, we are of the view that appellants duty liability is required to be requantified in terms of law declared by the Larger Bench in the case of Bhayana Builders (P) Ltd. [2013 (9) TMI 294 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)] - Matter remanded back. - Decided partly in favor of assessee. - ST/37/2010 - Final Order No. 53151/2016 - Dated:- 12-8-2016 - Ms. Archana .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

service tax and were filing ST 3 return for the period 2004 onwards and were discharging service tax liability accordingly. 2. The demand in the present case pertains to two different periods. It is seen that during the period 2005-2006, the appellants claimed the benefit of notification No. 15/2004, which allowed abatement to the extent of 67% of the value of the goods (from 2005 -2007). The said denial was on the ground that the appellants have received material from the service recipient, fr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

find that the issue on the said point is no longer res integra. As such, the Revenue's stand and the confirmation of demand on the said count cannot be upheld 3. The second limb of the demand pertains to the period 2007-2008. It is undisputed fact on record, admitted by the appellant himself that during the said period, no service tax returns were filed and no service tax was paid. The same was pointed out by the Revenue vide their letter dated 25.4.08 and it is only thereafter the appellant .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

above plea of the learned advocate, Ms. Suchitra Sharma, learned AR appearing for the Revenue, submits that the appellant was registered service tax payee and were duly filing the return for the previous two financial years. As such, it can be safely concluded that the appellant was aware of his liability to pay service tax. During the subsequent financial year 2007 -2008 also non-filing of return and non payment of service tax reflects upon the malafide of the appellant, thus calling for imposi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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