TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omotive Vs CCE Coimbatore [2018 (11) TMI 1150 - CESTAT CHENNAI] wherein it was held when reasonable cause for the failure to discharge service tax liability was available, and especially there is no evidence to show that that the delay / default was due to any wilful act to evade payment of duty, it is a fit case for invocation of Section 80 of the Act. There is no hesitation in holding that while the demand of tax liability is very much justified, imposition of penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 is not justified since there was reasonable cause for failure of the appellant to discharge tax liability - the penalty imposed under Section 77 ibid is fully justified and no interference is made with the same - appeal allowed i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the said amount of ₹ 77,94,334/- with interest appropriated the like amount paid by the appellant with interest, and imposed penalties under Section 76 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. Hence this appeal. 2. When the matter came up for hearing on 13.12.2018, on behalf of the appellants, Ld.Advocate Shri Siva Ramakrishnan made oral and written submissions which can be broadly summarized as under : i) Service Receivers of the Appellant Company were taking 5 to 6 months and some times more than 6 months for settling the bills of the Appellant. However, the Appellant was paying Service Tax in advance on billing basis to avoid confusion. Apart fro that, the Appellant had to pay PF and ESI to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v) They place reliance on the decision of the Hon ble Tribunal in Final Order No.41943/2018 in the case of Duster Total Solutions Pvt. Ltd.. Vs. Commissioner of GST Central Excise, Chennai South; Final Order Nos.42768-42769 / 2018 in the case of M/s.Sri Kalki Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of GST Central Excise, Chennai and Final Order No.42481-42482/2018 in the case of M/s.Jeyam Automotive Ltd., Commissioner of GST Central Excise, Coimbatore. 3. On the other hand, Ld. A.R Shri A.R. Balamurugan supports the impugned order. He justifies the imposition of penalty. He also submits that appellant being partnership concern was required to pay service tax by the 5th month of the month immediately following quarter in which the payments to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om evidence that there was any positive act of suppression with an intention to evade payment of service tax. Other than the delay caused due to financial crisis, we do not find any material to establish an intention to evade payment of service tax. 7.3 The Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of C.C.E., Coimbatore Vs. M/s. Sasi Advertising Pvt. Ltd. in C.M.A. No. 101/2018 dated 24.01.2018 had occasion to consider the appeal filed by the Department against the Order passed by the Tribunal, upholding the Order passed by the Commissioner setting aside the penalties imposed. The ground raised by the assessee in that case was that the assessee was undergoing much financial hardship. The Hon ble High Court held that the penalties imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee, on belated payment, we are of the view that the assessee substantiated reasonable cause for the failure in payment of service tax, within the stipulated time and hence, he is entitled to the benefit under Section 80 of the Finance Act. 7.4 In C.S.T., Chennai Vs. Lawson Travel Tours (I) Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (38) S.T.R. 227 (Mad.), the Hon ble High Court held that when the assessee faced financial crisis due to criminal breach of trust committed by their sub-agent and thereafter, paid the service tax voluntarily, the penalties imposed have been rightly set aside invoking Section 80. The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Dusters Total Solutions Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.S.T., Chennai vide Final Order No. 41943/2018 dated 28.06.2018 had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Finance Act, 1994. The ld. consultant has furnished documents to argue that there was only delay in payment of service tax and there was no act of suppression of facts with intention to evade payment of service tax. On perusal of the documents such as the list of sundry debtors etc., it is seen that there was huge amount pending as receivables. So also they had to meet expenses for salary, accident compensation of employees provided under manpower supply service. The department does not have a case that any of the transactions were unaccounted or that they had been indulging in a parallel accounting. It is commonly understood that the employees supplied through manpower supply service have to be given the salaries within due time. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
