Service Tax - Cestat Chennai – As the appellant has not paid the reduced penalty @25% as is required by law along with tax and interest within one month of issue of SCN, the Impugned Order demanding penalty under extended period of limitation is upheld – Appeal rejected [Order attached]

Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
25-Feb-2023 09:48:49
Order Date: 22 February 2023
Parties: M/s. Nebula Computers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Facts –
- The Appellant’s, M/s. Nebula Computers Pvt. Ltd books were audited and it was noticed that the appellant had rendered the services and realized an amount of Rs.4,90,79,293/- for the period from April 2009 to January 2010 but did not pay the service tax of Rs.50,55,167/- collected from their customers.
- It was also noticed that the appellant did not file ST-3 Returns for the half-year ending 30.9.2009. They had also paid service tax belatedly for the year 2008 – 2009 with interest but there was a short-payment of Rs.12,059/-. Hence Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant. The confirmation of demand and interest along with the imposition of penalty is justified.
- The appellant with regard to intention to evade payment of tax liability, submitted that they have filed statutory ST-3 Returns and had paid the entire service tax and interest and had intimated the fact through ST-3 Returns before the issue of show cause notice.
Issue –
- Whether the appellant is liable to pay the penalty or not?
Orders –
- The Tribunal observed that the appellant is pleading financial hardship for not paying the tax when due and are pleading for the benefit of not being penalised, for having subsequently paid the tax along with interest before the issue of show cause notice. But no substantive reasons have been demonstrated by the appellant to show that they were facing financial hardship.
- In the case of wilful suppression/fraud/collusion if the taxpayer pays service tax liability along with interest or if the taxpayer pays service tax liability along with interest and a penalty equal to 25% of service tax amount within a period of one month from the date of issue of show cause notice, then the adjudication proceedings can be concluded. But the appellant has not paid the reduced penalty as is required by law along with tax and interest.
- Hence, the appeal is hence devoid of merit and is rejected. The impugned order is upheld.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation