9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1779X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsel For Respondent : Mr.T. Ravikumar, Senior Standing Counsel JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Revenue challenging the order dated 15.10.2003, in Final Order No.945 of 2003 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Southern Regional Bench, Chennai (for brevity "the Tribunal"). 2. The above appeal has been admitted, on 26.09.2005, on the following su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. We have carefully examined the order passed by the Tribunal and the grounds raised by the Revenue before us. The question is whether the respondent is liable to pay interest for the delayed payment of service tax. The Tribunal in paragraph 5 of the impugned order has noted hereunder:- "5.We have considered the submissions made by both sides and find that during the period i.e. from 5.10.94 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om BSNL vs. CCE, Chandigarh (supra), we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. Ordered accordingly." 5. The Revenue is on appeal before us contending that the Tribunal erred in observing that the respondent-BSNL, during the relevant time, was paying the collections on day-to-day basis in the Consolidated Funds of India and hence, it can be taken as payment of service tax in time. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
