Asiya Cell Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem

Asiya Cell vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai Decided Jun 11, 2010

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/942902

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/942902
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Judge: The Honourable Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President
Decided On: Jun 11, 2010
Case Number: Appeal No.ST/177 of 2009
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

Asiya Cell

Advocate Shri M.N.Bharathi, Advocate. Shri C.Rangaraju, SDR.

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem

Excerpt

heard both sides on the appeal against imposition of penalty of rs.61,000/- under the provisions of section 78 of the finance act, 1994 for the belated payment of service tax of rs.1,20,718/- together with interest. 2. the assessees plead that levy of service tax on business auxiliary service came into effect only from 1.7.2003 and being a small assessees, they were not aware of their liability of tax and, on being informed by the department in writing in august 2004 to their liability, they paid the entire tax and interest for the period 2003-04 in oct-04. the submission of the assessees is well-founded as i note that the department has not established with any material on record that assessees had knowledge that they were rendering services liable to tax so as to hold them guilty of suppression. i, therefore, set aside the penalty and allow the appeal.

Full Judgment

Heard both sides on the appeal against imposition of penalty of Rs.61,000/- under the provisions of Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 for the belated payment of service tax of Rs.1,20,718/- together with interest.

2. The assessees plead that levy of service tax on Business Auxiliary Service came into effect only from 1.7.2003 and being a small assessees, they were not aware of their liability of tax and, on being informed by the department in writing in August 2004 to their liability, they paid the entire tax and interest for the period 2003-04 in Oct-04. The submission of the assessees is well-founded as I note that the department has not established with any material on record that assessees had knowledge that they were rendering services liable to tax so as to hold them guilty of suppression.

I, therefore, set aside the penalty and allow the appeal.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chen... Same Parties Asiya Cell vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge The Honourable Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President

Service Tax Together with In writing set aside