Settlement under DRS leads to appeal withdrawal and penalty upheld under Finance Act.

The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn after the appellants settled the determined amount under the Dispute Resolution Scheme (DRS), 2008, for short payment of service tax as a "Clearing and Forwarding Agent." The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, but the settlement under the DRS led to the withdrawal of the appeal, emphasizing the importance of utilizing such schemes for efficient resolution of tax disputes.

---

---

Issues:
1. Short payment of service tax by the appellant under the category of "Clearing and Forwarding Agent" during 2001-02 to 2003-04.
2. Imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.
3. Settlement of dues under the Dispute Resolution Scheme (DRS), 2008 affecting the appeal status.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, M/s. Anandi Agencies, had short paid service tax amounting to Rs.2,35,376 under the category of "Clearing and Forwarding Agent" for the period 2001-02 to 2003-04. A show-cause notice was issued, demanding the short paid tax along with interest, and a penalty of Rs.2,30,456 under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was imposed by the lower authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this order.

2. During the hearing, no representation was made on behalf of the appellants. However, a letter dated 5.1.2009 from M/s. Anandi Agencies was on record, claiming to have received Form-2 certifying full and final settlement of tax arrears under Section 96 (2) of the Finance Act, 2008, issued under the Dispute Resolution Scheme (DRS), 2008.

3. The JCDR submitted that the dues adjudged in the impugned order had been settled under the DRS, 2008. An order dated 7.10.2008 by the Asst. Commissioner determined the amount payable for the full and final settlement of tax arrears. A certificate in Form-2 dated 11.11.08 confirmed the payment of dues under the scheme. The JCDR argued that once dues are settled under the DRS, the appeal should be considered withdrawn.

4. After considering the submissions, it was found that the appellants had paid the determined amount under the DRS. According to the scheme, once the amount payable is determined, and a certificate in Form-2 confirming the payment is issued by the competent authority, any pending appeal in the matter stands withdrawn. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

This judgment highlights the significance of settling dues under the Dispute Resolution Scheme, leading to the withdrawal of pending appeals and providing a mechanism for resolving tax disputes efficiently.

---