75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

March 2015

2015-TIOL-313-CESTAT-MUM M/s. Lamour Advertising Agency vs. CCE

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri, Mandar telang Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
SCN should not be issued when service tax was paid along with interest on pointing out since there is no case for penalty.

Facts:
During the course of Audit of the Appellant, discrepancy was noticed between the turnover in the balance sheet and the ST-3 Returns. On being pointed out the entire amount along with interest was paid. Show Cause Notice was issued for imposition of penalty u/s. 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner Appeals confirmed the demand hence the appeal before the Tribunal.

Held:
The Tribunal noted that the discrepancy is only because of the accounting system while the balance sheet was prepared on a mercantile basis, the payment of service tax was on receipt basis. Therefore, there was neither short payment nor any intention to avoid payment of duty. Further, Show Cause Notice should not have been issued when the service tax was paid within a week on being pointed out.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

Business expenditure – Section 37 – A. Y. 2009-10 – Business of selling mobile hand sets and other electronic items and accessories – Advertisement expenditure – Expenditure is revenue in nature – AO not justified in treating it as differed revenue expenditure

2015-TIOL-193-CESTAT-MUM Kala Mines and Minerals vs. CC,CE & ST.