2008 (11) TMI 222 - HC - Service Tax

High Court affirms Tribunal decision in tax dispute, stresses Taxpayer Friendly Scheme, penalties under Finance Act.

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision in a tax dispute, emphasizing the Assessee's coverage under the Taxpayer Friendly Scheme and dismissing the ... Waiver of penalty - Assessee deposited the amount and also relied upon Taxpayer Friendly Scheme announced by the Finance Minister in September 2004, which remained operative upto November 2004, providing that if a service provider has failed to register himself due to ignorance, no penalty would be levied, if he made a declaration of his past liability. The Adjudicating Authority accepted the declaration and levied token penalty of Rs. 1,000/- only- The matter was thereafter reviewed by the Commissioner on the ground that conduct of the Assessee was not bona fide. The Tribunal, on appeal of the Assessee, restored the original order by observing that since there was confusion in the field, bona fides of the Assessee could not be doubted. – held that - In view of the finding that the Assessee was admittedly covered by the Scheme, we do not find that any substantial question of law arises – revenue appeal dismissed. Issues:1. Interpretation of the Extraordinary Taxpayer Friendly Scheme issued by the Finance Minister.2. Validity of penalties imposed under Sections 75A, 76, 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.Analysis:Issue 1: Interpretation of the Taxpayer Friendly SchemeThe appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 raised the question of whether the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) was correct in relying on the Taxpayer Friendly Scheme announced by the Finance Minister in September 2004. The scheme aimed to provide relief to service providers who failed to register themselves due to ignorance. The Assessee, engaged in providing advertisement services, did not pay service tax for a specific period. The Adjudicating Authority initially accepted the Assessee's declaration under the scheme and imposed a token penalty of Rs. 1,000. However, the Commissioner later reviewed the matter, questioning the Assessee's bona fide conduct. On appeal, the Tribunal reinstated the original order, citing confusion in the field and stating that the Assessee's bona fides could not be doubted. The High Court, after considering the Assessee's coverage under the scheme, found no substantial question of law and dismissed the appeal.Issue 2: Validity of Penalties ImposedThe second issue revolved around the penalties imposed under Sections 75A, 76, 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Revisionary Authorities exercised their powers under Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the Assessee's failure to obtain a service tax Registration Certificate, file Service Tax-3 Returns, and deposit the due amount of Service tax with the department. The Assessee's reliance on the Taxpayer Friendly Scheme was a key aspect in this context. While the Commissioner questioned the Assessee's conduct, the Tribunal upheld the original penalty decision, emphasizing the confusion prevailing at the time. Ultimately, the High Court, considering the Assessee's coverage under the scheme and lack of substantial legal questions, dismissed the appeal, thereby affirming the Tribunal's decision on the penalties.This judgment highlights the significance of Taxpayer Friendly Schemes in tax matters and the importance of assessing the bona fides of taxpayers in penalty imposition cases. The decision underscores the need for clarity and consistency in tax regulations to avoid confusion and ensure fair treatment of taxpayers.