Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2015 (11) TMI 524

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es. During the course of checking of records it was observed by the officer that during 2005-06 appellant had short paid service tax Rs. 48,702/-. However, the on pointed out by the department, the appellant vide letter dated 5/3/2010 informed that they have paid service tax outstanding against them. The show cause notice issued to the appellant for appropriation of service tax paid and imposition of penalty. Vide order-in-original, the adjudicating authority appropriated the service tax Rs. 48,702/- and interest paid by the appellant. He has also imposed penalty of Rs. 200 per day during which such failure continues or at the rate of two percent of such tax per month whichever higher starting with first day after due date till the date of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellants ground of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as in the present appeal is for the waiver of penalty invoking Section 73(3) of Finance Act, 1994. He submits that show cause notice issued invoking extended period, extended period invoked only when there is suppression of facts, fraud, collusion etc with intent to evade payment of service tax. It is his submission that when the non payment of service tax in this case is due to suppression of fact, collusion, fraud etc, provisions of Section 73(3) has no application in term of Section 73(4). Since in the present case the demand is admittedly for longer period and appellant has paid the same admittedly immunity provided under Section 73(3) cannot be extended to the appellan....