TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (1) TMI 736
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of service tax registration w.e.f. 12-1-2004. The department received information from M/s. Manikgarh Cement about the taxable service provided by the appellant. As per the information, the appellant were collecting service tax from M/s. Manikgarh Cement during the period October, 2006 to March, 2007 and April, 2007 to September, 2007 but were not paying the same to the department and also not filing the ST-3 returns in time to the assessment officers. Accordingly, the department issued two show-cause notices for two different periods, demanding service tax along with interest and invoking penal provisions. The case was adjudicated by the lower adjudicating authority by which service tax amounting to Rs. 3,55,666/-, education cess of Rs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not paid in time due to sickness of one of the family member. As regards the applicability of the circular dated 3-10-2007 to the present case, the learned JDR submits that the circular would be applicable only in cases where service tax along with interest and penalty equal to 25% of the service tax amount was paid within a period of one month from the date of issue of show- cause notice. He, therefore, reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 5. The learned counsel further submitted that in their appeal memo they have clearly mentioned that penalty under Section 76 and 78 cannot be imposed in view of the proviso inserted under Section 78 of the Act. In answer to a query, it is pointed out that this proviso has been ins....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f penalty equal to 25% of Service Tax amount. 7.2 Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore, 2010 (20) S.T.R. 523 (Tri.-Bang.) :- In this case original adjudicating authority did not impose any penalty on the assessee. Penalty was imposed in Order-in-Review which was set aside by the Tribunal. In the case before me original authority also imposed penalty and the appellate authority also confirmed it. 7.3 Manipal County v. Commissioner v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore, 2010 (17) S.T.R. 474 (Tri.-Bang.) : - Tribunal relied upon a Board's circular dated 3-10-2007 which is not applicable in the present case as penalty equal to 25% of Service Tax is also required to be paid along with Servic....