9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the adjustment of duty paid in subsequent period is disallowed and penalty was imposed for delaying in payment. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a Public Sector undertaking and engaged in the activity of provided 'Telecom Services' for the period 2008-2009. The appellant short paid service tax and shown in the same in ST-3 Returns. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice tax during the period 2009-2010 till four years, therefore, the proceedings were initiated and for delaying payment of service tax for the period 2008-2009. Penalty was also imposed after issuance of the show cause notice by invoking the extended period of limitation. Against the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. The Ld. Chartered Accountant on behalf of the appellant submits that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erms of Rule 6 (4A) and 6 (4B) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, the appellant is entitled for adjustments. Merely, for procedural lapse, the substantial benefit cannot be denied to the appellant. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. AR supported the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties. 6. Considering the fact that the issues raised are as under:- a) whether the penalty can be imposed by the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... required to pay differential service tax alongwith interest for the intervening period. b) Whether the adjustment of excess service tax can be allowed to the appellant in the facts and circumstances of the case or not? Admittedly, for the period April 2010 to Sept. 2010 the appellant filed service tax returns on 25.10.2010. In the said return, although the appellant paid short payment of servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
