2017 (4) TMI 160

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder imposing penalty under Section 73 of the Act. The respondent undertakes construction activities and for the relevant period, i.e. 2004-05 to 2008-09, the respondent was awarded a contract for construction of Cotton Market under Technology Mission on Cotton and Grain Market Yard for the Agriculture Produce Market Committee and Shopping cum Commercial Complex and Departmental Store for the Nagar Parishad. The respondent did not discharge the service tax liability on the said contract of construction work. During scrutiny of records, it was noticed that service tax was liable to be paid by the respondent on the aforesaid services. A show cause notice was served on the respondent but, before the service of the show cause notice, the res....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pondent was liable to pay service tax to the tune of Rs. 72,46,972/, but the respondent had only paid a sum of Rs. 63,71,163/before the show cause notice was served. The learned counsel relied on the judgments reported in (2009) 13 SCC 448 (Union of India Versus Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills), (2008) 13 SCC 369 (Union of India & Others Versus Dharmendra Textile Processors & Others) and (2012) 5 SCCC 523 (Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata Versus Plaxair India Private Limited) to substantiate his submission that no sooner than the service tax is not paid, the penalty is liable to be mandatorily imposed. On hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and on a perusal of the orders of the authorities, it appears that there is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ection 11D of the Central Excise Act. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal in this appeal, specially when the Tribunal has applied the provisions of Section 80(1) and 80(2) of the Act to hold that the penalty could not have been imposed on the respondent. We do not find that the Tribunal has committed any fault in invoking the provisions of Section 80 of the Act for setting aside the orders imposing penalty. The Tribunal rightly held that if the service tax liability and the interest thereon is discharged on the direction of the Central Excise officers, there was no need to issue a show cause notice. In the circumstances of the case, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal in....