Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (6) TMI 126

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri O.P. Agarwal, Advocate for the appellant Shri P. Juneja, Authorised Representative for the respondent ORDER ANIL CHOUDHARY: Heard the parties. 2. The issue in this appeal is, whether for recovery of interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994, show cause notice could be issued invoking extended period of limitation. 3. The brief facts are that the appellant is registered with the Department and providing services under the category of Construction of Residential Complex . Further, the admitted facts are that for the period October, 2011 to March, 2013, the appellant deposited .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Supreme Court in the case of Jay Bharat Maruti ltd. -2014 (307) ELT 282 (P H), wherein ruling of this Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Insecticides Ltd. 2013 (297) ELT 332 (Delhi) was reversed where this Tribunal had held that for recovery of interest under proviso under Section 75 of the Finance Act, there is no time limit. 5. Ld. Counsel for the appellant states that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred firstly relying upon the ruling of this Tribunal, which stands reversed by the subsequent ruling of the Punjab Haryana High Court. Secondly, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred holding that non-mentioning of section 73(1) read with proviso, in the show cause notice is only a clerical error and accordingly, t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aside. 6. Accordingly, ld. Counsel prays for allowing their appeal. 7. Ld. Authorised Representative relies upon the impugned order. He states that the case laws relied upon are distinguishable on facts. He relies upon the following case laws:- (1) Penna Cement Industries Ltd. -2015 (40) STR 295 (T-B) (2) Toyo Engg. Corporation Ltd.-2015(37) STR 238 (T-M) 8. Ld. Authorised Representative further contends that there is no dispute with regard to quantum of tax liability, which is admittedly paid. Hence, the interest under Section 75 is automatically attracted as the tax is paid quarterly, instead of monthly basis. 9. Having considered the rival cont .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates