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

M/s Bhoruka Aluminium Limited. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Mysore

2016 (11) TMI 1292 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Imposition of penalty - CENVAT credit - availing of services of foreign company, M/s Granco Clark Inc., USA for maintenance and repair of capital goods installed in the factory at Mysore - suppression of facts - Held that: I find that Section 73(3) is very clear as it says that if tax is paid along with interest before issuance of the show-cause notice, then in that case, show-cause notice shall not be issued. In this case, I find that the contention of the appellant that he bonafide believed th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the impugned order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not recorded any finding on suppression of facts by the appellant with an intention to evade tax. In view of the above discussion, I set aside the impugned order. - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee. - ST/25283/2013-SM - Final Order No. 20794/2016 - Dated:- 20-9-2016 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Mr. K. Parameswaran, Adv. For the Appellant Mr. N. Jagadish, A.R. For the Respondent ORDER The present appeal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to March 2007. The preventive officers visited to the appellant s factory in July 2010 and thereafter, a letter dated 23/08/2010 was issued by the Department. Consequently, the appellant paid entire service tax with interest and communicated the same vide letter dated 11.11.2010. Thereafter, the appellant availed Cenvat credit of entire amount of service tax during November 2010 itself, which was not objected by the Department. A show-cause notice dated 24.5.2011 was issued alleging suppression .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder-in-Original except dropping the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by the said order of the Commissioner (Appeal), the appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act is contravention to the provisions of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. He further submitted that service tax along with interest has al .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y, not sustainable and tenable. The learned counsel relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of South India Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. & S.T. reported in 2016-TIOL-2294-CESTAT-BANG wherein in the similar circumstances, the penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act was dropped in toto. He also he relied upon the following case laws : (i) Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. Vs. U.O.I. [2013 (29) S.T.R. 9 (Del.)] (ii) Amit Sales Vs. C.C.E. [2009 (13) S.T.R. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| 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