Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the confirmation of interest and penalty for delayed payment of foreign travel tax was sustainable, particularly when the show cause notice was issued beyond the prescribed limitation period and the notice did not allege suppression, wilful misstatement or collusion.
Analysis: The appellant had deposited the foreign travel tax and interest shortly after the due date and the return had been filed within the prescribed period. The notice for penal action was issued beyond the statutory period of six months, reckoned from the relevant date as per the rules, and no allegation of suppression, wilful misstatement or collusion was made. On these facts, the confirmation of penalty could not be sustained. The interest demand was also found unsustainable since the interest amount had already been paid along with the tax.
Conclusion: The confirmation of interest and penalty was not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the impugned order was set aside on the ground of limitation, with consequential relief to the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a penal notice is issued beyond the prescribed limitation period and contains no allegation of suppression, wilful misstatement or collusion, the penalty cannot be sustained; a demand already discharged cannot be confirmed again.