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 →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Versus Royal Projects (Groups)

Penalty u/s 76 and 78 - the appellants have discharged a substantial portion of tax liability before the issue of notice, the notice itself as per Section 73(3) should have been limited to the unpaid tax - Held that: - The Commissioner (Appeals) has given proper justification for dropping the penalty under Section 76 and 78 - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - ST/2150/2012-SM - Dated:- 19-1-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Shri Pakshi Rajan, AR For the Appellant Shri Sandeep Go .....

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 had not registered themselves under Section 69 of the Finance Act, 1994 for collection and payment of service tax. During the period 16.06.2005 to 31.01.2006, they did not pay any service tax and a show-cause notice was served upon them demanding service tax along with cess and interest thereon and also proposing to impose penalties under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Cochin vide Order-in-Original dated 09.11.2007 confirmed the d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the appellants have discharged a substantial portion of tax liability before the issue of notice, the notice itself as per Section 73(3) should have been limited to the unpaid tax, if any, and thus restricting the penalty to such amount. Having failed to provide an acceptable computation of tax due in the notice and owing to lack of examination of that aspect in the impugned order, the quantification of penalty is not possible. Aggrieved by the said order, the Revenue has filed the present .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

therefore the extended period can be invoked as the assessee has suppressed the facts/information from the Department and violated the provisions of Finance Act, 1994 and therefore penalty under Section 78 is also justified. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent defended the impugned order by submitting that there was no suppression of facts with intent to evade duty and it is the assessee who approached the Department seeking registration and on the same day the Department co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lex service only from 16.06.2005 and the demand pertains to seven and half months immediately following. It is also clear that the appellant had sought registration. The reason for non-payment of tax had been amply elaborated and, in the context of facts and procedure for levy and payment of tax, cannot be faulted. The appellant had also remitted most of the tax due with interest well before issue of notice. No evidence has been adduced to show that the appellant had deliberately suppressed any .....

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
  ↓     Updates     ↓  


|| 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