TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 69
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....service', availing CENVAT Credit of the Service Tax paid on the input services received by them, which was being utilised towards payment of Service Tax on the business auxiliary service. It is a fact borne on record that they are also distributing the credit to their other units in their capacity as an Input Service Distributor (ISD). 2. It appears that there was an internal audit conducted by the Internal Audit Party of LTU, Chennai, during December 2010 and April 2011, during which they appear to have noticed that M/s. Areva group had deputed some of their employees to the appellant in India, for utilisation of their expertise and upon payment of a fee. This, according to the Revenue, fell within the purview of manpower supply agency se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e original authority vide Order-in-Original No. LTU/061/2013-ADC(LTU) dated 18.03.2013 proceeded to confirm the demand as well as appropriation, as proposed in the Show Cause Notice. 5. Insofar as the limitation and the suppression of facts is concerned, the officer has recorded the plea of the assessee that there was enough scope for doubt as to the chargeability and that the issue involved intricate interpretation of legal provisions and hence the larger period could not be invoked, for which reason, no penalty could be imposed. The original authority has, however, held that the assessee nowhere demonstrated a reasonable cause for its failure to remit Service Tax and that if the issue involved intricate interpretation of the legal provis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther hand, Smt. Anandalakshmi Ganeshram, Ld. Departmental Representative, relied on the findings of the lower authorities. 9. Having heard the rival contentions, we have gone through orders of lower authorities. It is a matter of record, and admittedly so, that as on the date of Show Cause Notice, the appellant had discharged the Service Tax liability, as quantified and proposed in the Show Cause Notice, along with the appropriate interest as well and hence, according to us, issuance of Show Cause Notice was only to levy penalty under Section 78 ibid. on the ground of suppression of facts. 10.1 The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, LTU, Bangalore v. M/s. Adecco Flexione Workforc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontained in sub-sec. (3) of Sec. 73. The Parliament has expressly stated that against persons who have paid tax with interest, no notice shall be served. If notices are issued contrary to the said Section, the person to be punished is the person who has issued notice and not the person to whom it is issued. We take that, in ignorance of law, the authorities are indulging in the extravaganza and wasting their precious time and also the time of the Tribunal and this Court. It is high time that the authorities shall issue appropriate directions to see that such tax payers are not harassed. If such instances are noticed by this Court hereafter, certainly it will be a case for taking proper action against those law breakers. 4. In that view of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....djudication proceedings, provisions of Section 73(3) will be applicable in this case and there was no necessity of issuing any show cause notice to the appellant. In such cases no penalty is imposable by virtue of Explanation 2 to sub- section (3) of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. 9. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE & ST, LTU, Bangalore v. Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd. - 2011-TIOL-635-HC-KAR-ST = 2012 (26) S.T.R. 3 (Kar.) has upheld the ratio that in case the entire amount of Service Tax liability, interest thereon stands paid by the appellant before issuance of show cause notice, hence provisions of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 should be made applicable and no show cause notice should have been i....