2011 (7) TMI 343

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atch the products to the customers. For these services appellants were paid commission from time to time. Proceedings were initiated after enquiry and investigation against the appellant and service tax demand amounting to Rs.4,08,970/- for the period from 01.05.06 to 31.03.09 was confirmed. Penalties under Sections 76, 77 & 78 of Finance Act, 1994 were also imposed.   2. The learned Chartered Accountant on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appellant has not contested the duty demand at any stage. He also submits that service tax and interest was paid before issuance of show cause notice. Further the original adjudicating authority had imposed 25% of the service tax as penalty under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994 and this wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd show cause notice was issued subsequently. He relies on the decision in the case of M/s. Aneja Property Dealer Vs. CCE Ludhiana reported in 2008-TIOL-CESTAT-DEL to support his submission that if proceedings were initiated after the amendment, the law as it existed at the time of offence would be applicable and therefore the show cause notice issued in May 2009 could not have invoked proposal for penalty under Section 76 of Finance Act, 1994.   3. The learned DR would submit that ignorance of law cannot be a ground for waiver of penalty. For this purpose he relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Quality Welding Works Vs. CCE Ludhiana reported in 2011 (21) STR 187 (Tri. Del.). Further, he also relies upon the decisio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rtment that the appellants were not aware of the statutory provisions. Further, it was also observed that the records nowhere disclosed that in the statement dated 13.09.05 of Shri Balwinder Singh had disclosed about ignorance of law. Therefore the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the letter dated 24.08.06 appeared to be an after thought. Further, I also take note of the fact that it is not only the knowledge of law that has been pleaded by the learned Chartered Accountant as a ground for waiver of penalty under Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994. Apparently the business was conducted by the lady and she was acting as a commission agent. The company for which she was acting had not advised her about her liabilities to service tax is one of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing before original adjudicating authority. Under these circumstances, it is felt that a reasonable cause has been shown for the purpose of Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994 in this case. Further the fact that as soon as the investigations started, she paid the service tax without raising any issues also goes in her favour. As regards the decision cited by the learned DR, the circumstances in this case are entirely different and are not comparable. Further, the provisions of Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994 are to be applied by looking at facts and circumstances in each individual case and there cannot be a uniform set of principles or guidelines. In any case such set of guidelines have not been framed also till now and nor was such guidelines....