Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link: https://ims.go2customer.com
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft info@binarysoft.com
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: VAT Audit :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: VAT RATES :: form 3cd :: cpt :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: empanelment :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: TDS :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: due date for vat payment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
 
 
From the Courts »
 Samvardhana Motherson International Ltd. (Formerly Known As(M/s Samvardhana Motherson Finance Ltd.)a Vs. Assitant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 22(1) & Anr.
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-2 Vs. M/s Frontline Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
 Ram Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-64(2) & Anr.
 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 Vs. St Microelectronics Private Ltd.
  The Chamber Of Tax Consultants vs. UOI (Delhi High Court)
 M/s Ess Distribution (Mauritius) S.N.C.Et Compagnie Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -1(2)(2) International Taxation, New Delhi
 Commissioner Of Income Tax (Ltu) Vs. ESPN Software India Ltd.
 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,
 ITO vs. Gymkhana Club (ITAT Chandigarh)
 SRD Nutrients Private Limited vs. CCE (Supreme Court)
 The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Exemption Vs. The Fertilizers Association Of India

Penalty sustainable when service tax paid post enquiry
January, 21st 2008

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

PRINCIPAL BENCH - COURT NO. 1
Service Tax Appeal No. 401 of 2007
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 94/CE/CHD/2007 dated 19.04.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh).

DATE OF HEARING : 19.12.2007
DATE OF DECISION : 19.12.2007

M/s ACME Tele Power Pvt. Ltd.       -                                     Appellant
(Rep. by NONE)
VERSUS
CCE, Chandigarh                                  -                      Respondent
(Rep by Smt. A.P. Tiwari, JCDR)

CORAM :     HONBLE MS JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, VICE-PRESIDENT

Imposition of penalty is sustainable when tax liability was paid only after the inquiry was conducted by the Department.  Therefore, there is no merit in the appellants contention that the demand of tax together with interest, prior to the issue of the show cause notice, would absolve them of the liability to pay penalty. (Para 2)

O R D E R

PER JYOTI BALASUNDARAM  :

1.             In this case, the entire Service Tax together with interest was paid by the appellants, who were found to have been providing services of Erection, Installation and Commissioning of plant & machinery and equipments.  The appellants challenged the impugned order on the ground that, they were not to pay penalty due to instant payment of tax together with interest [the Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the tax payment and proportionately scaled down the penalty amount to Rs. 3,97,634/-].

2.             I have heard the learned JCDR for the respondent and perused the record.  None is present for the appellants in spite of notice.  I find that the issue has been settled by this Tribunal in the case of Mett Macdonald Ltd. vs CCE, Jaipur, 2006 (2) STR 524, holding that, imposition of penalty is sustainable when tax liability was paid only after the inquiry was conducted by the Department.  Therefore, there is no merit in the appellants contention that the demand of tax together with interest, prior to the issue of the show cause notice, would absolve them of the liability to pay penalty.   Following the ratio of the above decision, I uphold the impugned order of imposition of penalty and reject the appeal. 

(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court on the 19TH day of December, 2007)

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Article Management Solutions System Article Management Software S

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions