SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

ARCHANA WADHWA
Chitrita Virnave – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.K. Roychowdhury,A.K. Pandit

JUDGMENT

Per Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member - Inasmuch as the issue involved in all the four appeals is identical, I take up the Stay Petitions as well as the Appeals together.

2. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the appellants. Accordingly, I have heard Shri A.K. Mondal, Ld. JDR for the Revenue and have gone through the impugned orders passed by the authorities below.

3. The challenge in the appeal is only of the imposition of personal penalties of varied amounts imposed upon the appellants who are Architects by profession. As per facts on record, I find that the Service Tax was imposed on rendered Architects with effect from 16th October, 1998. Thereafter, the appellants got themselves registered with the Central Excise authorities. However, the Service Tax was not deposited by them for certain quarters and ST-3 returns were not filed for the said period. The appellants’ defence is that the provisions of Service Tax in respect of Architects were stayed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras on the Writ Petition filed by "The Indian Institute of Architects" on behalf of its Members. As such, the Service Tax were not being paid by them. However, as soon as, the appellants came to k

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top