2019 (3) TMI 1226

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....S.Ramasamy, learned Senior Panel Counsel, who have assisted this Court on the legal issue raised in this appeal. 2. The assessee has filed this appeal under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, the Act) challenging Final Order No. 43443/2017 dated 27.12.2017 on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai (for brevity, the Tribunal). 3. The appeal has been filed by raising the following substantial questions of law : "i. Whether the Tribunal was correct in refusing to consider the plea of the appellant resisting the demand of interest for the extended period of time for the reason, merely on the ground that the appellant had earlier admitted and paid the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve an explanation stating that they had been paying the service tax on the invoice raised basis and not on the receipt basis. 8. This explanation did not find favour with the Revenue, resulting in issuance of a show cause notice dated 29.5.2008, in which, the Revenue noted that the service tax to the tune of Rs. 3,14,344/- pertaining to the three years under consideration had been paid by the assessee on 08.2.2008. However, the interest had not been paid on such delayed payment and the total interest was worked out to Rs. 3,24,685/-. The assessee paid the interest to the tune of Rs. 47,814/- for the period from October 2002 to 08.2.2008. 9. The assessee appeared to have stated that the claim for interest for more than five years was h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Revenue, Tax Research Unit. It was further contended that the revision of the registration certificate was granted to the assessee by the Department itself to one of business auxiliary services and that the Adjudicating Authority ought to have held that when no tax was liable to be paid for the disputed period, the question of demanding interest did not arise. The assessee set out the factual position and also reiterated that the Adjudicating Authority ought to have taken note of the amendments issued to the registration certificate revising the taxable service provided by them from the advertising agency to business auxiliary service. Further, the question of limitation was also canvassed before the CCE(A) and the penalty imposed was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessee did not contest the demand of service tax. Nevertheless, when the demand for interest was made, the assessee remitted partial payment of Rs. 47,814/- and that was for the period from October 2002 to 08.2.2008. In the said show cause notice, there was a demand for differential interest to the tune of Rs. 2,76,871/-. After receipt of the said show cause notice, the assessee claimed that the demand was hit by limitation. Nevertheless, under protest, interest was paid and the matter was contested before the Adjudicating Authority, who rejected the assessee's claim and confirmed the demand in the said show cause notice dated 29.5.2008. 18. Before the CCE(A), the assessee questioned the ambit of taxable service of advertising ag....