TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 68
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The appeal was admitted by a bench of this court on the following substantial questions of law: "(1) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in not holding that the show cause notice issued is bad in law and not maintainable when the entire service tax along with interest was paid before issue of show cause notice on the facts and circumstances of the case. (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the penalty imposed under section 76 of the Act, section 77 of the Act a sum of Rs. 5000/- and section 78 of the Act a sum of Rs. 56,304/- on the facts and circumstances of the case. (3) Without prejudice whether ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he penalty under Section 76 of the Act and imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 77 of the Act whereas, a penalty of Rs. 56,304/- was imposed under Section 78 of the Act. The appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) and submitted the written submissions. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) by an order dated 10.12.2012 dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant. The appellant thereupon filed an appeal before the tribunal. The tribunal by an order dated 20.04.2017 has dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal erred in law in holding that appellant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ICE TAX VS. MOTOR WORLD & ORS', (2012) 79 DTR (KAR) 151, and 'NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CO. LTD VS. CIT', 1998 (99) E.L.T.200 (SC). 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that appellant had admittedly collected the service tax however, he has not deposited the same, and therefore, the proceeding for levy of penalty was rightly initiated within extended period of limitation. It is also submitted that in the order, passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) cogent reasons have been assigned for upholding the order of Assistant Commissioner, which has been affirmed by the tribunal. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions in 'THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ided is whether appellant is liable for penalty under Section 76, Section 77 and Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994, when appellant has discharged his all dues along with interest prior to issue of show cause notice and appellant pleaded grounds of ignorance and financial difficulty for his non payment with reference to detection which could only be surfaced during departmental investigation where appellant has neither paid duty, nor filed return and suppressed the fact with an intent to evade payment of duty for which proceeding is initiated invoking extended period in the ibid show cause notice. 5. I find that the appellant is a film producer and has collected his production charges (4.60 lakhs) along with Service Tax of Rs,56304/- but no....