2010 (9) TMI 572

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Korde, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri N.A. Sayyad, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order].  - The appellant has filed this appeal against the imposition of penalty under Section 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a practicing Civil Engineer (registered as Architect) since 2005 and was paying service tax and filing Tax Return....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....being an Architect was providing the service to his clients and charging service tax from them. He has to pay service tax from the charges received from their clients during the year. Moreover, as the appellant was not having an Accountant during the period to calculate appropriate service tax amount payable, he could not pay the service tax and could not file the Return in time. On realising the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ST return, the lower  authorities has rightly imposed the penalty under Section 76 on the appellant. He further submitted that in the case of B.L. Mantri & Associates (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 781 (Tri. - Del.) wherein it was held that "no sufficient staff to calculate the service tax is not a ground for reduction in penalty." He further submitted that in the case of Asst. Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt from the year 2005 and paying Service Tax Returns under the category of Architect Service in time. Only during the year 2007-08 the appellant could not file the service tax return in time along with service tax due to the reasons that he was not having any accountant to calculate the appropriate service tax payable but it is also on record that the appellant himself has calculated and paid the ....