General Manager, Telecom Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. (Appeals) - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. this appeal arises from order-in-appeal no. 4/2003-s.t., dated 20-1-2003 by which the interest and penalty has been imposed on the ground that the service tax which has been deposited by the appellants had not been transferred to the commissioner, service tax. the appellant's contention was that in terms of p and t financial hand book and telecom manual, there is no delay of payment of service tax. they were to recover the tax from their customers and deposit the same. it is his submission that they have followed the rules and hence, there was no delay in depositing the amounts.2. the learned counsel submits that this very issue in their own case has been decided by the president's bench by final order no. 4/2003, dated 2-6-2003 by which it has been clearly held that there was no fault on the part of the appellant in depositing the amount and the delay has been accepted due to accounting problems, for which interest and penalty cannot be imposed. the learned counsel submits that this bench has been pleased to accept their appeal by following the ratio of the said judgment by final order no. 1497/2004, dated 27-9-2004, 2006 (1) s.t.r. 200 (tri. - bang.). a copy of the order is produced by him.3. the learned jcdr has also produced a copy of the order passed in appellant's own case as reported in 2006 (3) s.t.r. 159 (tri.) : 2004 (174) e.l.t. 246 (tri.-chennai) by which the demands for interest and imposition of penalty for delayed credit in the central government department has held to be not a fault on the part of the appellant, hence penalty and interest have been set aside.4. on a careful consideration, we notice that the issue is covered in the assessee's favour by the cited judgment rendered in their own case.the president's bench by final order no. 4/03, dated 2-6-2003, 2006 (3) s.t.r. 122 (tri.) : 2003 (160) e.l.t. 318 (tri.) after due consideration has noted that there was no delay in depositing the amounts by the assessee in the respective account head in terms of their rules. there was a delay in transfer from the principal controller of accounts to the revenue department, the same has to be held not a fault on the part of the appellants and hence, the impugned order imposing penalty and interest is set aside. in view of the cited judgment, the imposition of penalty and interest is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any.

Judgment:
1. This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No. 4/2003-S.T., dated 20-1-2003 by which the interest and penalty has been imposed on the ground that the Service Tax which has been deposited by the appellants had not been transferred to the Commissioner, Service Tax. The appellant's contention was that in terms of P and T Financial Hand Book and Telecom Manual, there is no delay of payment of Service Tax. They were to recover the tax from their customers and deposit the same. It is his submission that they have followed the rules and hence, there was no delay in depositing the amounts.

2. The learned Counsel submits that this very issue in their own case has been decided by the President's Bench by Final Order No. 4/2003, dated 2-6-2003 by which it has been clearly held that there was no fault on the part of the appellant in depositing the amount and the delay has been accepted due to accounting problems, for which interest and penalty cannot be imposed. The learned Counsel submits that this Bench has been pleased to accept their appeal by following the ratio of the said judgment by Final Order No. 1497/2004, dated 27-9-2004, 2006 (1) S.T.R. 200 (Tri. - Bang.). A copy of the order is produced by him.

3. The learned JCDR has also produced a copy of the order passed in appellant's own case as reported in 2006 (3) S.T.R. 159 (Tri.) : 2004 (174) E.L.T. 246 (Tri.-Chennai) by which the demands for interest and imposition of penalty for delayed credit in the Central Government Department has held to be not a fault on the part of the appellant, hence penalty and interest have been set aside.

4. On a careful consideration, we notice that the issue is covered in the assessee's favour by the cited judgment rendered in their own case.

The President's Bench by Final Order No. 4/03, dated 2-6-2003, 2006 (3) S.T.R. 122 (Tri.) : 2003 (160) E.L.T. 318 (Tri.) after due consideration has noted that there was no delay in depositing the amounts by the assessee in the respective account head in terms of their rules. There was a delay in transfer from the Principal Controller of Accounts to the Revenue Department, the same has to be held not a fault on the part of the appellants and hence, the impugned order imposing penalty and interest is set aside. In view of the cited judgment, the imposition of penalty and interest is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any.