Raman Colour Lab Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ...

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 352/2009 dated 11/09/2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore]

For approval and signature:

HON'BLE Mr. B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2 Whether it should 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 Departmental authorities? Yes

Raman Colour Lab Pvt. Ltd. 190, Old Bank Road, Mysore  570 001 Appellant(s)

Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore V Floor, Trade Centre, Bunts Hostel Road, Mangalore  575 003 Respondent(s)

Appearance:

Mr. Cherian Punnoose, Advocate A.K.B. Associates #211, Commerce House, 9/1, Cunningham Road, Bangalore  560 052 Karnataka For the Appellant

Mr. S. Teli, AR For the Respondent

Date of Hearing: 20/03/2015 Date of Decision: 20/03/2015 CORAM:

HON'BLE Mr. B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER

Final Order No. 20815 / 2015

The appellants were registered provider of service under the category of photography service since 2001. On the basis of intelligence gathered the preventive officers visited the appellants premises during July 2007 and noticed that the appellants had not paid the service tax and had not filed the returns from November 2005 to December 2007, even though they collected the service tax from their customers. Department also noticed that during the said period the appellants had wrongly availed the cenvat credit to the extent of Rs. 1,85,375/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Five only). Accordingly a show cause notice dated 12.05.2008 was issued demanding the service tax of Rs. 24,75,851/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty One only) for the period from 11/05 to 12/07 with interest and penalty. Wrongly availed cenvat credit of Rs. 1,85,375/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Five only) was also demanded with interest and penalties were proposed.

2. The main contention of the appellant is that extended period could not have been invoked in this case since in November 2005 itself the department was aware that appellant was undertaking activities which are liable to tax. Further it was also submitted that appellant suffered severe financial loss and as a result had to close down the unit. At this time learned counsel submits that at present the unit is functioning. He fairly agrees that service tax has been collected and not paid.

3. After considering the submissions, I find that this is not a case where any leniency is warranted. Even after being informed by the Revenue the appellant continued to collect the tax and did not credit it to the Governments account and even after adjudication process and appeal process the entire amount of tax is yet to be paid leave alone interest and penalties. Under these circumstances I do not find any merit in the appeal and accordingly the appeal is rejected.

(Order pronounced in open court)

(B.S.V. MURTHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER

iss