TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period for which the demand has been issued - The appellants contention that section 73(3) is applicable in their case is not correct because provision of section 73(3) of Finance Act, 1994 are subject to the provisions of sub-section 4 of section 73 of Finance Act, 1994. Once, the ingredients of section 73(4) are present the provisions of section 73(3) are not applicable. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - ST/99/11 - FO/A/75804/2017 - Dated:- 23-3-2017 - Satish Chandra, President And Shri Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Shri Kulamani Rout, Advocate for the Appellant Shri S.Mukherjee, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue ORDER Per: Shri Devender Singh The short issue involved in this case is regarding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcular dated 03.10.2007 and argued that once Service Tax interest is deposited by the assessee, no show cause notice is to be issued and proceedings should be concluded. They have also requested for invoking section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 and relied upon the following judgements:- a) CC CE, Vapi v. Shree Soap Chemical Ind. [2008 (11) S.T.R. 515 (Tri.-Ahmd.)] b) Santhi Casting Works v. CCE, Coimbatore [2009 (15) S.T.R. 219 (Tri.-Chennai)] c) CCE, Kanpur v. Pradeep Enterprises [2009 (16) S.T.R. 419 (Tri.-Del.)] d) CCE, Kanpur v. J.R. Singh [2009 (16) S.T.R. 484 (Tri.-Del.)] e) R.A.C. Steels v. CCE, Salem [2010 (18) S.T.R. 775 (Tri.-Chennai)] 3. Ld.AR reiterated the findings in the Order-in-Origin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts of section 73(4) are present the provisions of section 73(3) are not applicable. The appellants contention that Section 80 benefit should be given to them is also not tenable because they have not shown any reasonable cause either before the adjudicating authority or before this Tribunal for failure to pay due Service Tax or to comply in terms of registration and filing of returns. The case law of Shree Soap Chemical Ind. (supra) , cited by the appellant are not applicable as in the said matter there was manufacture under job-work, which is not the case here. In the case of Santhi Casting Works (supra), the Tribunal found that section 73(3) was applicable, which was brought by ld.Advocate, is not applicable in the present case b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
