Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... 1. heard both sides on the appeal against the order-in-revision under section 84 of the finance act, 1994 passed by the commissioner of service tax, imposing a penalty of rs. 2 lakhs on the assessee, a proprietary concern of shri k. gopalakrishnan, engaged in providing mandap keeping ..... authority that charge of suppression of taxable value with intent to evade payment of service tax is proved and the assessees have not shown any reasonable cause as required under section 80 of the finance act, 1994. i, therefore, uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal. ..... the amenity charges in the schedule of the services of mandap keeping cannot be accepted as he was well aware of benefits under direct taxes (depreciation under the income tax act). the assessees have also not shown that they were under the bonafide belief for non-payment of service tax. since the st-3 return did not show the amenities charges .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... ltd. vs cce coimbatore [2010-tiol-603]. as regards penalty, i find that in view of clear language of section 80 of the finance act, 1994, the assessees are correct in contending that once the shelter under section 80 has been extended by the commissioner (appeals) and this part of the order has not been challenged by the ..... when the processing of goods was included in the definition of business auxiliary service. he also contended that since the commissioner (appeals) had extended the benefit under section 80 by accepting that the assessees had a reasonable cause for failure to pay service tax, no penalty should have been retained [commissioner (appeals) has reduced the ..... the assessees challenge the demand of service tax of rs.37,637/- together with interest and penalties imposed under sections 76 and 78 of the central excise act, 1944. the demand is on certain activities such as processing and assembling jeans buttons with metal inserts and nylon inserts, and processing needle threader, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... only on 2.4.2008 and therefore refund claim is within the time limit of one year from the date of payment of service tax. reference is made to section 83 of the finance act, 1994 and since the relevant date for claim of service tax in terms of explanation b (f) is the date of payment of service tax, refund claim filed ..... 5 of the cenvat credit rules, 2004. the lower appellate authority whose order is under challenge in the present appeal rejected the claim on the ground that notification no.5/2006-ce dt. 14.3.06 as amended, issued under rule 5 of the cenvat credit rules, 2004, specifies that the refund claim should be filed on quarterly basis along with ..... on 19.3.2009 is within the time limit of one year stipulated under section 11b as the service tax was paid on 2.4.2008. further contention of the assessees is that no time limit for refund claim has been specified in notification no.5/2006-ce, as per the decision of the tribunal in gtn engineering (i) ltd. vs .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... by setting aside demand for tax in excess of rs.rs.5,20,274/- already paid by the appellant and the penalty imposed under section 78 of finance act, 1994. ..... department. the assessee did not produce any form-16a (tds certificate) for verification. however, they provided a copy of form 26as (annual tax statement under section 203aa of the income tax act, 1961) taken from traces 9tds reconciliation analysis and correction enabling system) of the income tax portal. as per form 26as the gross amount paid has ..... be considered on the same footing as the various assessees mentioned in para 10 (iv) earlier. so the penalty under section 78 is waived. there is a penalty of rs.5000/- imposed under section 77 of the act for not taking out registration in time. it is proper to uphold this small penalty. appeal is thus partly allowed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... proceedings for imposition of penalty under section 76 and 78 of the finance act, 1994 on the ground that the service tax liability had been discharged together with interest prior to the issue of the show-cause notice. in revision, the commissioner imposed a penalty of rs.1,24,607/- in terms of section 76, together with penalty of rs ..... .1000/- under section 77. hence this appeal. 2 ..... for the reason that the assessees did not file st-3 returns within the time limit prescribed under the act. 3. the appeal is thus partly allowed by reducing the penalty under section 76 to rs.21,079/- (rupees twenty-one thousand and seventy nine only) and upholding the penalty of rs.1000/- under section 77 of the finance act, 1994.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
i have heard both sides on the imposition of penalties under the provisions of section 76 and 78 of the finance act, 1994 for belated payment of service tax on construction of residential complex. i accept the plea of the assessees that there was reasonable cause for failure to pay tax within time as levy on such services came into effect only in june-05 and the period of demand is july-05 to september-06 in other words, due to the fact that the levy was in nascent stage, assessees were not aware of the levy. i therefore extend the protection under section 80 of the act by setting aside the penalties under section 76 and 78. penalty under section 77 of the finance act, 1994 is however upheld as there is no cause to set it aside. 2. the appeal is thus partly allowed as above.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... rules, 2004 were notified vide notification no.23/04-ce (nt) dt. 10.9.2004 which was issued in exercise of the powers conferred by section 37 of the central excise act, 1944 and section 94 of the finance act, 1994. he further observed that no rule can so be interpreted as to take this scope beyond the power under which that rule has been ..... by them in the course of their business of manufacture. the observation made by the learned commissioner that the rules are to be interpreted as per the provision of the act are not in keeping with the interpretation as given by the honble high court of bombay in the case of ultrtech cement (supra). therefore, as held by the hon .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... demand along with interest and imposed penalty equal to the amount of credit under rule 15(4) of the cenvat credit rules, 2004 r/w section 11ac of central excise act and r/w section 78 of the finance act, 1994. commissioner (appeals) while upholding the adjudication order set aside the imposition of penalty. hence, revenue filed this appeal. 5. on ..... the impugned orders passed by the commissioner (appeals) whereby the penalty imposed under rule 15(4) of cenvat credit rules, 2004 read with section 11ac of the central excise act, 1944 and section 78 of the finance act, 1994 were set aside. 3. heard both sides and perused the records 4. the relevant facts of the case, in brief, are ..... the decision of the honble supreme court in the case of maruti suzuki ltd. vs. cce 2009 (240) elt 641 (sc) set aside the penalty imposed under section 11ac of the act, 1944. the honble supreme court in the case of union of india vs. rajasthan spinning and weaving mills 2009 (238) elt 3 (sc) held that penalty .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... engaged in the manufacturing of cartons, boxes etc., classifiable under sub-heading no.4819.12 of the schedule to the central excise tariff act, 1985. the goods were charged nil rate of duty till 28.2.2001. by finance act, 2001 effective from 1.3.2001, rate of duty was fixed @ 16% ad valorem and benefit of ssi exemption notification no. ..... perusal of the records, we find that the duty was imposed on the goods in question at the rate of 16% ad valorem with effect from 1.3.01 by finance bill, 2001. simultaneously, the respondents were eligible to avail the benefit of ssi exemption notification no. 8/2000 as amended upto aggregate value of clearance of rs. 1 ..... the clearances effected in the succeeding financial year 1989-90. this argument is quite attractive, but we find no way to concede the same. as per general clauses act, financial year is the period starting from the firt of april of the particular year. so the preceding financial year mentioned in the notification can relate only to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
..... following the ratio of the honble bombay high court in cce thane vs nicholas piramal (india) ltd. [2009 (244) elt 321 (bom.)]. law has been amended retrospectively by the finance act, 2010. hence taking note of the retrospective change, we set aside the impugned order and remit the case for fresh decision to the adjudicating authority for taking into account the ..... .42,31,516/-, rs.18,12,080/- stands reversed. we accept the payment already made as sufficient for the purpose of compliance with the statutory requirement of section 35f of the central excise act, 1944 and waive predeposit of the balance amounts and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal which is taken up for final hearing today, with the consent of both .....
Tag this Judgment!