Nebulla Computers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai - Court Judgment |
| SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/941765 |
| Court | Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai |
| Decided On | Sep-02-2011 |
| Case Number |
Appeal No.ST/S/290 of 2011 & ST/416 of 2011 [Arising out of
Order-in-Appeal No.60/2011 (MST |
| Judge | THE HONOURABLE MS. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, VICE-PRESIDENT |
| Appellant | Nebulla Computers Pvt. Ltd. |
| Respondent | Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai |
| Advocates: | For the Appellants: J. Shankararaman, Advocate. For the Respondent: Parmod Kumar, SDR. |
Excerpt:
.....decision of the tribunal. 2. the assessees have deposited the service tax and the interest even prior to the issue of the show-cause notice. therefore, the only question for decision is as to whether penalty proceedings can continue even after the payment of tax and interest prior to the issue of the notice. this issue stands decided in favour of the assessees by tribunal’s decision in amiras enterprises vs cce rajkot [2010 (20) str 631] and service care vs cst, chennai [2010 (20) str 344] wherein it has been held that proceedings including that for penalty are deemed to have concluded as per section 73 (3) of the finance act, 1994 when tax and interest were paid before issue of scn. following the ratio of the above decision, i set aside the penalty and allow the.....
Judgment:1. For reasons recorded below, I waived predeposit and proceeded to hear the appeal itself at this stage with the consent of both sides, as the issue stands settled in favour of the assessees by earlier decision of the Tribunal.
2. The assessees have deposited the service tax and the interest even prior to the issue of the show-cause notice. Therefore, the only question for decision is as to whether penalty proceedings can continue even after the payment of tax and interest prior to the issue of the notice. This issue stands decided in favour of the assessees by Tribunal’s decision in Amiras Enterprises Vs CCE Rajkot [2010 (20) STR 631] and Service Care Vs CST, Chennai [2010 (20) STR 344] wherein it has been held that proceedings including that for penalty are deemed to have concluded as per Section 73 (3) of the Finance Act, 1994 when tax and interest were paid before issue of SCN. Following the ratio of the above decision, I set aside the penalty and allow the appeal.