Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Akar Enterprises Vs. Ccex and Cus.

Akar Enterprises vs Ccex and Cus.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jan 18, 2008
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/46846

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Akar Enterprises

Respondent

Ccex and Cus.

Excerpt

1. this stay application is filed by the applicant against the order-in-revision no. 151/nsk/06/819 dated 29.1.2007. after hearing both sides for some time on the stay application, i find that the appeal itself can be disposed of at this juncture. after granting the waiver of pre-deposit of the amount, i take up the matter for disposal.2. the issue involved in this case is regarding the enhancement of penalty on the appellant. the adjudicating authority has imposed penalty of rs. 100/- only upon the appellant under section 77, while the commissioner in a show cause notice issued to the appellant seeks to impose penalty under section 76 of the finance act, 1994. after hearing the appellant, the commissioner has imposed equivalent amount of penalty of rs. 17,929/-. i find that the issue involved in this case is regarding the discharge of service tax liability in respect of the service provided by the appellant. the entire amount of service tax, which was due, was paid on 12.7.2004. the amnesty scheme, which was introduced by the central government for non-imposition of penalty, if the service tax liability and interest thereof is paid before 30.10.2004, squarely applies in this case. i also find that this case is identical to the tribunal's decision in the case of cce, bhopal v.r.k. electronics cable network 2006 (2) str 153 (tri-del), wherein the tribunal has held that when assessee who did not at all comply with service tax law can be given immunity, provided they pay service tax along with appropriate rate of interest, no reason why law abiding assessee who had got himself registered more or less in time and started paying service tax alongwith interest, shall be denied benefit of waiver of penal provisions.3. as such, i find that penalty imposed on the appellant is liable to be set aside and i do so. the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

Full Judgment

1. This stay application is filed by the applicant against the Order-in-Revision No. 151/NSK/06/819 dated 29.1.2007. After hearing both sides for some time on the stay application, I find that the appeal itself can be disposed of at this juncture. After granting the waiver of pre-deposit of the amount, I take up the matter for disposal.

2. The issue involved in this case is regarding the enhancement of penalty on the appellant. The adjudicating authority has imposed penalty of Rs. 100/- only upon the appellant under Section 77, while the Commissioner in a show cause notice issued to the appellant seeks to impose penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. After hearing the appellant, the Commissioner has imposed equivalent amount of penalty of Rs. 17,929/-. I find that the issue involved in this case is regarding the discharge of service tax liability in respect of the service provided by the appellant. The entire amount of service tax, which was due, was paid on 12.7.2004. The Amnesty Scheme, which was introduced by the Central Government for non-imposition of penalty, if the Service Tax liability and interest thereof is paid before 30.10.2004, squarely applies in this case. I also find that this case is identical to the Tribunal's decision in the case of CCE, Bhopal v.R.K. Electronics Cable Network 2006 (2) STR 153 (Tri-Del), wherein the Tribunal has held that when assessee who did not at all comply with service tax law can be given immunity, provided they pay service tax along with appropriate rate of interest, no reason why law abiding assessee who had got himself registered more or less in time and started paying service tax alongwith interest, shall be denied benefit of waiver of penal provisions.

3. As such, I find that penalty imposed on the appellant is liable to be set aside and I do so. The impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial