GOLDEN PRINCE WINE INDIA PVT. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant filed this appeal against imposition of penalty under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

(2.) THE relevant facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are receiver of transport service by road. Service tax was introduced on 01.01.2005. By letter dated 31.10.2005, the Superintendent of Central Excise informed the appellant levy of tax on such service. Accordingly, the appellant applied for registration on 30.12.2005. They also paid tax of Rs. 76,847/ - and education cess of Rs. 1537/ - on 31.12.2005 for the period April 2005 to December 2005. But for the period 01.01.2005 to 31st March 2005, they paid tax of Rs. 12,803/ - and education cess of Rs. 256/ - on 22nd March 2006 due to non availability of the figures during the material period. The adjudicating authority confirmed the tax already deposited before issue of the show cause notice. He imposed penalty of Rs. 89,650/ - under Section 76 and penalty of Rs. 1,000/ - under Sections 77 and further penalty of Rs. 89650/ - for suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of tax. Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal of the appellant. The learned Counsel on behalf of the appellant submits that it is a new levy on GTA service. He submits that the CBEC vide letter No. 341/18/2004 -TRU (PT) dated 17.12.2004 clarified that in case of omission in payment of tax or procedural lapse by persons liable to pay service tax on the goods transported by road before 31.12.2005, no penal provision should be invoked. He also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Mumbai v. Gamma Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2006 (4) STR 591 (Tri. Mumbai).

(3.) LEARNED DR reiterates the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the appellant paid the tax on 31.12.2005 for the period April 2005 to December 2005 and there is a long delay for payment of tax for January 2005 to March 2005. He further submits that the appellant opted registration after the letter issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise and therefore there is suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of tax.