Appeal allowed, penalties set aside for service tax liability. Tribunal recognizes voluntary payment exemption, genuine belief.

The appeal was allowed, and the penalties imposed on the appellant for service tax liability for the period October 2002 to September 2004 were set aside. The Tribunal held that the appellant's voluntary payment of the service tax, upon being alerted by departmental authorities, exempted the need for a show-cause notice. The Tribunal acknowledged the appellant's genuine belief that their services related to managing marriages were not taxable. Additionally, penalties imposed by lower authorities were set aside, and the Cross Objection filed by the Revenue was disposed of accordingly.

---

---

Issues:
Service tax liability on the appellant for the period October 2002 to September 2004.

Analysis:
The appeal was against Order-in-Appeal No. V2(A)STC/33/2007/1840 dated 22.10.2009, with a Cross Objection filed by the Revenue. The issue revolved around the service tax liability of the appellant for the specified period. The appellant argued that they paid the service tax and interest on 30.10.2004 after being alerted by departmental authorities during a visit to their premises. They believed they were not liable for 'Event Management Services' as they were primarily involved in services related to marriages. On the other hand, the Revenue contended that the appellant, registered in September 2003, did not pay the service tax until prompted by the department. The Revenue also disputed the applicability of the 'Extra Ordinary Tax Payers Friendly Scheme' to the appellant.

Upon reviewing the records, it was confirmed that the appellant indeed paid the service tax and interest on their own accord on 30.10.2004, which was not contested by them at any stage. The show-cause notice was issued on 31.10.2005. The Tribunal held that the appellant's voluntary payment of the service tax, upon being alerted, fell within the provisions that exempted the need for a show-cause notice if the tax liability was discharged by the assessee based on their own ascertainment or upon notification by Central Excise Officers. The Tribunal also acknowledged that the appellant may have genuinely believed that their services related to managing marriages were not taxable. Consequently, invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, the Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed by the lower authorities. Additionally, the Tribunal referenced the appellant's argument regarding the applicability of the 'Extra Ordinary Tax Payers Friendly Scheme,' citing a relevant case law (Union of India v. Amit Kumar Maheshwari - 2009 (13) STR 119 (Raj)) to support their decision.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed, and the penalties imposed on the appellant were set aside. The Cross Objection filed by the Revenue was also disposed of accordingly.

---