TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate Tribunal CESTAT decision: Service tax upheld, penalty under Section 76 improper, case remanded for proper computation.</h1> <h3>Friendz Exhibition & Promotions (P) Ltd. Versus C.S.T., Delhi I</h3> Friendz Exhibition & Promotions (P) Ltd. Versus C.S.T., Delhi I - TMI Issues: Service tax liability non-payment, interest and penalty imposition, proper computation of penaltyIn the judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI, the appeal was directed against an order upholding the service tax demand, interest, and penalty confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant failed to pay service tax dues for a specific period, leading to the confirmed demand. The appellant argued that due to inadvertence, it did not reverse its Cenvat account within the stipulated time for discharging the tax liability, asserting that the available Cenvat credit balance should suffice. The Revenue, on the other hand, supported the findings of the impugned order.Upon examination, it was found that the service tax liability was not discharged within the prescribed time, resulting in automatic interest liability as per Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The confirmation of interest liability was deemed in accordance with statutory provisions. However, the imposition of an equal amount of penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 was deemed improper. The statute mandates penalties for non-payment of service tax within the stipulated time, with specific criteria for penalty calculation. As there was no specific provision allowing for an equal amount of penalty, the order imposing such a penalty was considered unsustainable. The case was remanded back to the original authority for the proper computation of the penalty amount under the un-amended provisions of Section 76.Consequently, the impugned order was confirmed regarding the service tax demand and interest, but the computation of the penalty under Section 76 was deemed necessary to be revisited by the original authority for accurate quantification. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, with the matter referred back for the precise determination of the penalty amount.
TaxTMI 