2018 (1) TMI 494
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmovable property services and had not paid the applicable service tax. They were into the business of renting services since 2007 and they obtained registration during February 2008 and they had paid service tax for the period since July 2007. But due to confusion regarding payment of service tax on renting services they stopped paying service tax since October 2008. After being informed by the Department during July 2012 they have paid the service tax dues from October 2008 to March 2012 with interest. That as per Section 80(2) of the Finance Act inserted from 28.05.2012 no penalty may be imposed on them since they paid the dues before 17.10.2012. During the investigation they paid service tax of Rs. 6,28,145/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Twenty Ei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... did not pay the service tax to the appellant and that s why the appellant did not pay the same to the Government. He further submitted that by the impugned order, the penalty on account of late fee under Section 70 of the Finance Act 1994 has wrongly been imposed as the said Section is not applicable in the present case. In support of his submission, he relied upon the decision of Sree Kanya Combines Vs. CCE, Visakhapatnam-II 2016 (43) S.T.R. 604 (Tri.-Hyd.) and submitted that this decision is squarely applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case. 4. On the other hand the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order and submitted that the appellants are not entitled to avail the benefit of Section 80 (2) of the Finan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shall be imposable. The appellant has established that the failure was caused because they were a small scale service provider with regard to the service of sale of space for advertisement . They bona fidely believed that no tax was payable on the services of renting of immovable property during the relevant period. In the case of Mahesh Vakatawarmal Rathod (supra), the Tribunal in a similar set of facts has set aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. In the present case, there is no allegation of fraud, suppression of facts or wilful misstatement. The service tax on renting of immovable property was not paid as the issue was contentious and there were decisions in favour of assessee also. Following the judgment....