Anil Prakash Soni vs Cce, Jaipur
- CitationAppeal No. ST/53063/2014-ST-SM
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal reduces a penalty under the statutory mechanism for payment of penalty at a reduced percentage, relying on the appellant's prior deposit of the entire service tax demand and the modest amount involved, so that where the demand has already been paid, interest and 25% of the equal penalty are deposited within thirty days of receipt of the order, the penalty stands reduced to 25%, failing which the full equal penalty becomes payable.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
(Arising out of OIA No.19 (OPD)/ST/JPR-II/2014 dt.25.2.2014 passed by CCE(A), Jaipur)
Date of Hearing/Decision 03.08.2015
For approval & Signature:
Honble Smt.Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
1. Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2. Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? No 3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order? seen 4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities? Yes
Anil Prakash Soni Appellant
Vs.
CCE, Jaipur Respondent
Appearance:
Present for the Appellant: Shri Vijai Kumar, Advocate
Present for the Respondent: Shri G.R.Singh, DR
Coram: Honble Smt.Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Final Order No.52466/2015
Per: Sulekha Beevi C.S.
The appeal has been filed challenging demand of service tax and imposition of penalty by the impugned order.
2. The learned Counsel submitted that he is confining his prayer only against imposition of penalty as the entire demand of service tax has already been deposited by the appellant. He requested for the benefit of reduced penalty of 25%.
3. Learned DR defended the impugned order.
4. On perusal of the records, I find that as the appellant has already deposited the demand of service tax and the amount involved being only Rs.14,443/- a lenient view can be taken of reducing the penalty to 25%. Therefore if the appellant deposits interest (if not deposited earlier) and 25% of penalty imposed within a period of 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order the penalty will stand reduced to 25%. On failure to deposit within 30 days the appellant is liable to pay the full amount of equal penalty of Rs.14,443/-.
5. The appeal is thus partly allowed in the above terms.
(pronounced & dictated in the open court)
(Sulekha Beevi C.S.)
Member (Judicial)
mk
2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free