Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/CASE LAW/2015-16/2874

Whether penalty can be imposed when tax along with interest paid before issuance of SCN?

Case:- FORTUNE NETWORK PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C. EX., CUS. & S.T., VADODARA-II
 
Citation:- 2015 (39) S.T.R. 689 (Tri. - Ahmd.)
 
Brief facts:- This appeal has been filed by the appellant with respect to OIA No. PJ/619/EDR-11/2012-13, dated 26-3-2013. The issue involved in the present proceedings is whether the penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 are imposable upon the appellants when the entire amount of Service Tax leviable have been paid by the appellant along with interest, before the issue of show cause notice. First Appellate Authority held the penalties imposed upon the appellant appropriate because tax amounts were recovered from the customers.
 
Appellant’s contention:- Shri Dhaval Shah, learned Advocate, appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that the period of dispute is from 1-4-2006 to 31-3-2007. That as a result of visit made by the officers on 13-3-2007 to the premises of the appellant the proceedings started. It was his case that there was delay in filing the first return for the period 1-4-2006 to 13-3-2007. Subsequently, the returns were filed by the appellant in time. It was his case that Service Tax liability was correctly calculated by the appellant and the amount available in the Cenvat credit account was promptly debited at the end of the month for which Service Tax was payable. That due to financial difficulty there was delay in payment of first return of the Service Tax and the same was paid on 14-3-2007, 23-3-2007 and 29-3-2007 which was before the issue of show cause notice dated 9-2-2011.
 
Respondent’s contention:- Shri J. Nair, Authorised Representative appearing on behalf of Revenue argued that the appellant only started filing returns after the case was booked by the officers of the Revenue. That once the amounts were collected and not paid within the date will amount to suppression with intention to evade payment of Service Tax. The Authorised Representative, therefore, defended the orders passed by the lower authorities.
 
Reasoning of judgment:-It is observed from the case records that the appellant was registered with the Revenue and was paying the Service Tax. It is the case of appellant that during the relevant period there was financial difficulties therefore, the appellant could not pay the entire Service Tax within the prescribed time. It is also observed that except for the first periodical return the appellant was showing the correct Service Tax liability in the returns and that amount available in the Cenvat credit account was debited by the appellant after the end of each month. Once the correct duty amount is shown in the returns there cannot be any intention to evade payment of Service Tax which is also paid by the appellant before the issue of show cause notice along with interest. In view of the above, there was reasonable cause for the appellant for not paying the entire Service Tax which was truly reflected in the periodical returns filed by the appellant. Under the Finance Act, 1994, there are provisions for late payment of Service Tax along with interest which was done by the appellant before the issue of show cause notice. Accordingly, the case was also covered by Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 and there was no need to issue show cause notice in this case. Appellant is also eligible for the benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.
In view of the above observations, appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.
 
Decision:-Appeal allowed
 
Comment:-The analogy of the case is that penalty is not imposable when the Service Tax payable has been shown in returns but service tax amount was not paid in time due to financial crunch. As the Service tax has been paid in full with interest before issue of show cause notice, there is no intention to evade Service Tax. Accordingly, the benefit of section 73(3) of the Finance Act was extended and penalty was dropped.  

Prepared by:- Monika Tak 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com