TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1432X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to remit to the Government cannot be considered as an act of suppression. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of C.S.T., Chennai Vs. M/s. Lawson Travel and Tours (I) Pvt. Ltd. [2015 (1) TMI 232 - MADRAS 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 should have been rightly set aside by invoking Section 80 of the Act. The penalty imposed under Section 78 ibid is unwarranted and requires to be set aside - impugned Order is modified to the extent of setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 78 ibid only without disturbing the demand of service tax, interest or the penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2.1 She submitted that the appellant was under much financial constraints as their customers did not pay up the amount within the period. They were unable to discharge their service tax liability as they did not receive the same from their service recipients. 3.2.2 Further, the proprietor, who was managing the business, was not well versed with the day-to-day matters concerning accounts and taxation. The accounts were entrusted to an Accountant who was only a part-time worker and did not continue in the service for long and left the assignment without giving any proper guidance or information with regard to the service tax. Further, the clients were releasing the amounts in instalments or in a phased manner and that the same was just to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot a reasonable cause for failure to pay the service tax. 5. Heard both sides. 6. Ld. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is contesting only the penalties imposed. Equal penalty under Section 78 of the Act has been imposed by the adjudicating authority, which has been upheld in the impugned Order. Ld. Counsel for the appellant has been at pains to argue that the appellant was undergoing much financial constraints as the service recipients were not paying up the amounts. It is also submitted that the entire service tax demand has been paid up by them. 7. On perusal of records, we find that other than the allegation that the appellants collected service tax and failed to remit the same to the Government, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
