2019 (3) TMI 417 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Whether for non-payment of service tax within the stipulated time, the appellant is exposed to the penal consequences provided under Section 76 of Finance Act? – Held that:- Section 76 of the Act mandates that in case of non-levy, short levy or non-payment or short payment of service tax, penalty at the appropriate rate shall be imposed on the assessee – Admittedly, the service tax liability along with interest had been deposited by the appellant during the course of adjudication proceedings. Thus, the appellant is exposed to penal consequences provided under Section 76 of the Act – appeal dismissed – decided against appellant. – Appeal No. ST/86286/2018 – A/85325/2019 – Dated:- 21-1-2019 – Mr. S.K.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
that the appellant was engaged in the business of providing taxable services under the category of Business Auxiliary Service , Erection, Commissioning & Installation and Works Contract Service , defined under the Finance Act, 1994. During the disputed period, though the appellant had reflected its service tax liability in the revised ST-3 Returns, but did not deposit the service tax attributable to provisions of the service. I find that the lower authorities have recorded that the appellant had collected the service tax amount from its client but did not deposit the same into the Government exchequer. For non-payment of service tax, the department proceeded against the appellant through issuance of show-cause notice. The matter was adj
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ion 76 of the Act ibid. Section 76 of the Act mandates that in case of non-levy, short levy or non-payment or short payment of service tax, penalty at the appropriate rate shall be imposed on the assessee. Admittedly, the service tax liability along with interest had been deposited by the appellant during the course of adjudication proceedings. Thus, under the circumstances of the case, the appellant is exposed to penal consequences provided under Section 76 of the Act. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by both the lower authorities in confirming the penalty under Section 76 of the Act. 5. Therefore, I do not find any merits in the appeal filed by the appellant. Accordingly, same is dismissed. (Order dictated in Co
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =