9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it in November 2012 wherein it was detected that the Appellant has not paid the Education Cess of Rs.75,452/- and SHE Cess of Rs.54,228/- totaling Rs. 1,29,680/-. The Audit party demanded this amount to be paid along with interest of Rs.38,531/-. The Appellants have paid this amount vide Challan No. 6004 dated 12/11/2012 immediately after the nonpayment was pointed out by the Audit Department. Subsequently, Show Cause Notice was issued and after due process, the lower authorities confirmed the demand and appropriated the amount paid and imposed a penalty of Rs.1,68,211/- under section 78. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is before the Tribunal. 2. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that they have paid the Education Cess and SHE Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing authority as well as the appellate authority seem to think. If an assessee does not pay the tax within the stipulated time and regularly pays tax after the due date with interest. It is something which is not pardonable in law. Though the law does not say so, authorities working under the law seem to think otherwise and thus they are wasting that valuable time in proceeding against persons who are paying service tax with interest promptly. They are paid salary to act in accordance with law and to initiate proceedings against defaulters who have not paid service tax and interest in spite of service of notice calling upon them to make payment and certainly not to harass and initiate proceedings against persons who are paying tax with in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard I also find that ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in his order has made a categorical finding that the elements of fraud, suppression, misstatement, etc. were not present in this case. Revenue has not contested his findings by filing appeal. In view of these facts the appellants' case is fully covered by the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. 8. It is not in dispute in this case that the appellant had discharged the entire Service Tax liability and interest thereof before the issuance of show cause notice. The issue is regarding the imposition of penalty on the appellant under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. I find that once the appellant has already discharged Service Tax liability and the interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
