Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Warna Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 22 March, 2006
ORDER Krishna Kumar, Member (J)
1. Heard both sides.
2. The Id. Counsel for the appellants submits that entire Service tax has already been paid along with the interest prior to issue of show cause notice. The Id. Counsel also submits that he is not contesting Service tax, interest and the penalty of Rs. 2,950/- imposed under Section 77 of the Service Tax Act. He is only contesting the penalty imposed under Section 76 on the ground that since the Service Tax has already been paid along with the interest prior to issue of show cause notice, the penalty under Section 76 is not leviable. In this regard he relied on the decision in the case of Catalyst Capital Services (P) Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2006 (3) S.T.R. 582 (Tribunal) : and in the case of Urban Improvement Trust v. CCE . He also relied on the decision in the case of CCE v. Viswanath Karkera reported in 2006 (1) S.T.R 282 (Tri.) and submits that since the Service Tax has been paid along with the interest the penalty imposed under Section 76 may be set aside.
3. I fully agree with the Id. Counsel for the appellant that since the Service Tax has already been paid along with the interest prior to issue of the show cause notice the penalty cannot be imposable. I, therefore, confirm the Service Tax along with the interest and penalty of Rs. 2,950/- imposed under Section 77 as the same is not contested. As regards the penalty under Section 76, the same is set aside in view of the above decisions.
(Pronounced in Court)