TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Taking in to consideration these contentions as well as the fact that the appellant is a Government of India under taking, the penalty imposed u/s 76, in my view is unwarranted - I do not find any reason to interfere with the penalty of ₹ 10,000/- imposed u/s 77 as the appellants did not file their returns in due time - appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant. - ST/315 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is the case of the department that appellants did not pay the applicable interest for the delayed payment to the tune of ₹ 9,66,588/-. A Show Cause Notice was issued proposing to recover the interest on delayed payment of service tax and for imposing penalties under the provisions of Section 76, 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1944. After due process of law the original authority confirmed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants were under bonafide relief that they have made excess payment for the previous period and that the excess paid amounts could be adjusted for the service tax payable for the relevant period. He also submitted that appellant is a Government of India under-taking and that therefore, the appellants cannot be saddled with any intention to evade payment of duty. 3. On behalf of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed under Section 76, in my view is unwarranted. The appellants have already discharged the service tax liability and are not contesting liability to pay the interest on the delayed service tax. I am of the view that the penalty imposed under Section 76 requires to be set aside. However, I do not find any reason to interfere with the penalty of ₹ 10,000/- imposed under Section 77 as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
