2006 (7) TMI 20

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....03 which upheld the order of interest and imposing penalty on the appellant. 2. The relevant fact that arises for consideration are the appellant is a Secondary Switching Area (SSA) of BSNL the Government of India undertaking unit till 01.10.2000 subsequent to 01.10.2000 is an autonomous body. The appellants were required to deposit the service tax collected by them for the period October 2000....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the appellant submits that the imposition of the penalty on the appellant is unwarranted, as they have followed the directions as given by their head office. It is also his submission that the question of interest under Section 75 could also not arise in as much that they have never defaulted with the transfer of the amount to the department of Telecommunication for the period in question. He p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2001 and subsequent change in their body corporate, there was delay in implementing the new procedures as directed by the department of Telecommunication vide their letter dated 18th December, 2000. The said letter dated 18th December, 2000 of the department of Telecommunication reads as under:- "It is suggested that the service taxes are paid by the circles to the DOT Cells who can directly op....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant have been transferring the service tax payable to the accounts of the Department of Telecommunication through their head offices. Even if we consider letter dated 18th December, 2000 (as reproduced above) indicate the payment of service tax by the appellant directly, interest, if any, table on the outstanding payment from the appellant from 19th December,2000  till the discharg....