2018 (5) TMI 1466

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....payment of service tax in respect of 4 invoices and service tax was paid on these invoices by the appellants on their own ascertainment with a delay of 6 months to 3 years. When the department when conducted an audit on 4.01.2016 to 12.01.2016 it found that the appellant had delayed the payment of service tax under reverse charge mechanism but the interest amounting to Rs. 24,87,141/- due thereon had not been discharged by the assesse, at the behest of the department, the appellant later on paid full interest liability on 18.06.2016. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant on 02.01.2017 demanding Service tax of Rs. 8,81,082/- and interest of Rs. 24,87,141/- already paid by assesse and proposing penalty on the appellant under Section....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-I 2016 (45) STR 338 (Tri. Mum) * Modern Woolens vs CCE, Jaipur-II 2017 (52) STR 288 (Tri. Del). Ld. Advocate also relies on the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the order of the Tribunal in the case of Jet Airways (India) Ltd. 2017 (7) GSTL J35(SC). 3. Ld. AR for the Revenue submits that there was long gap in payment of duty and the delayed payment was made repeatedly. She also pleads that the Ld. Adjudicating authority has given sufficient relief in penalty as per law under Section 78. She also pleaded that the interest was paid at the behest of the department. Ld. AR relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in UOI vs Rajashtan Spinning & Weaving Mills 2009 (238) ELT 3 (SC). 5. Heard both the sides and perused the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... notice. The ingredients of Section 78 like suppression or malafide intent to evade duty do not emerge from the facts of the case. 8. I find that in a similar scenario where the service tax as well as interest had been paid before the issuance of show cause notice, this Tribunal in the case of Arcgate vs CCE Jaipur-II (supra) had held that penalty was not justified and set is aside. Relevant findings of the Tribunal decision are extracted below: "4. I have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. The service tax liability is not disputed in the present case. The same has been discharged with applicable interest, for delayed payment, more than 4 months before the issue of notice. In the normal course the case gets closed withou....