Commissioner of CGST, Pune-I Versus M/s. Shirdi Country Inns Pvt. Ltd.
Service Tax
2018 (1) TMI 532 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 15-12-2017
ST/87144/17 – A/91625/2017
Service Tax
Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member(Judicial)
Shri Suresh, AC(AR) for the Revenue
Shri Sujay Kantawala, Advocate for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Mrs. Archana Wadhwa.
Being aggrieved with that part of impugned order Commissioner(Appeals) vide which he has set aside the penalty on the respondents, while upholding the confirmation of demand, Revenue has filed the present appeal.
2. After hearing both sides duly represented by Shri Suresh, ld.AC(AR) for the Revenue and Shri Sujay Kantawala, ld. Advocate for the respondent I find that
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
is something that can not be dismissed straightaway in this case. A delay in payment of taxes, in absence of any other convincing evidence, is more reflective of lack of promptitude than deliberate evasion. Since the appellant has already deposited a substantial amount upto the stage of adjudication and did not contend the tax liability and have in fact also paid the dues in respect of their other units which were not covered under the Centralized Regn. which only establishes their bonafide action. Thus, I find that the appellants have sufficiently established their bonafide of action leading to non-payment of taxes in time without any malafide intention. Accordingly, I set aside the penalty imposed under section.
As regards the imposition
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =