News Update

PM to hold roadshow in Puri on MondayViolations of economic sanctions: Criminal penalties come into forceBengaluru Customs nabs 4 pax with gold powder worth Rs 1.96 CroreKejriwal’s assistant put in police custody for 5 days in Swati Maliwal caseAllahabad HC upholds decision to dismiss judicial officer demanding dowryNawaz Sharif alleges former Chief Justice plotted to oust him as PM in 2017Heavy downpours claim 50 lives in Central AfghanistanSoaring funeral costs compelling people to let go bodies unclaimed in Canada9 pilgrims burnt to death as bus catches fire near Nuh in HaryanaSpain denies dock permission to Indian ship carrying arms to Israel12 Unicorns, over 125 startups commit to onboarding ONDCBEML secures Rs 250 crore order from Northern Coal FieldsBharat Parv celebration takes centerstage at Cannes Film FestivalSteel industry should work towards reducing emissions: Steel SecretaryI-T - Additions framed on account of unexplained cash credit & unexplained money, are not tenable where cash deposits & withdrawals were of personal funds & were done through banking channels: ITATUS says not too many vibrant democracies in the world than IndiaI-T - Benefit of section 11(2) can not be denied merely on reasoning that form 10 is filed belatedly: ITATIndia says Chabahar Port to benefit Central Asia and AfghanistanRussia seizes Italy’s UniCredit assets worth USD 463 mnCus - Order re-determining transaction value based on CRCL test report is not correct & hence unsustainable: CESTATCus - If price is not sole consideration for sale, then transaction value can be rejected under Rule 8 of Export Valuation Rules & then must be redetermined sequentially through Rules 4 to 6: CESTATSC upholds ICAI rules capping number of audits per year
 
ST - There is no tax amount under dispute but only penalty, interest and late fee - pre-deposit of 10% of penalty is mandatory u/s 35F of CEA, 1944: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, AUGUST 07, 2017: THE matter was listed for maintainability of appeal for want of pre-deposit.

The appellant has submitted that a total service tax demand was raised of Rs.19,48,95,104/- against which an amount of Rs.19,83,47,424/- was deposited, and, therefore, no further pre-deposit was required.

None appeared on behalf of the appellant.

The AR submitted that the impugned order only confirmed penalty and interest and there is no order for demand of service tax. Inasmuch as, duty/tax is not under dispute but only penalty and interest and, therefore, appellant is required to make pre-deposit of 10% of penalty amount of Rs.97,44,755/-.

The Bench extracted the operative portion of the order passed by the adjudicating authority and which reads -

(i) I confirm demand of interest at the appropriate rates to be recovered from M/s VEL under section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 in respect of the service tax belatedly paid and or payable by them.

(ii) I impose penalty of Rs.97,44,755/- (Rupees Ninety seven lakh forty four thousand seven hundred fifty five only) on M/s VEL under the provisions of section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 for failure to pay service tax on time in accordance with the provisions of section 68 of the said Act read with Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994.

(iii) I confirm imposition of fine of late fee amounting to Rs.67,400/- (Rupees sixty seven thousand four hundred only) as applicable under section 70 of the Act read with rule 7C of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, to be recovered from M/s VEL for not filing the ST-3 returns prescribed under rule 7 ibid within the due dates for filing such returns till the date of filing such returns.

The CESTAT, therefore, observed -

"…, it can be seen that there is no service tax amount which is under dispute. The dispute is regarding penalty, interest and late fee. Therefore, in terms of section 35F, the appellant is required to deposit 10% of duty if duty and penalty is under dispute and if only penalty is under dispute then 10% of such penalty should be deposited as a pre-deposit. We, therefore, of the view that appellant is required to make pre-deposit of 10% penalty imposed in the impugned order. In the interest of justice, we allow the appellant to make such pre-deposit within a period of 4 weeks and compliance of the same be reported on 11.08.2017…"

It is also emphasized that in case the appellant failed to make the pre-deposit by the appointed date, the appeal would stand dismissed.

(See 2017-TIOL-2808-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.