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

ARCHANA WADHWA
Arc. Hemant S. Dugad – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.S. Burad,Tarun K. Granil

ORDER

1. The appellant is engaged in providing the services of architecture. They were registered with the Central Excise Department with effect from 17-9-2003. However, during the periods October, 1998 to September, 2002 and October, 2002 to June, 2003, the appellant did not pay service tax totally amounting to Rs. 51,425. Accordingly various show-cause notices were issued to him. The appellant deposited the service tax before the issuance of show-cause notice along with interest of Rs. 16,249. Assistant Commissioner while adjudicating the show-cause notices appropriated the service tax and interest so paid by the appellant. He further imposed penalty of Rs. 500 under the provisions of section 76 and of Rs. 500 in terms of section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 for late deposit of tax and non-filing of returns. The said order of the Assistant Commissioner was reviewed by the Commissioner, who enhanced the penalty of Rs. 500 - imposed under section 76 to the amount of tax so confirmed. The said order is impugned before the Tribunal.

2. I have heard Sh. S.S. Burad, Advocate appearing for the appellant and Sh. Tarun Kr. Grovil, Jt. CDR appearing for the revenue.

3. Commissioner while enhan

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