COMMR. OF C. EX. Vs. STEEL CRAFT (INDIA)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revenue has approached this Court by invoking Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 (for brevity, 'the Finance Act') read with Section 35 -G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity, "the Excise Act") challenging order dated 1 -1 -2008 (A -3) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity, 'the Tribunal').

(2.) THE Tribunal has recorded categorical findings that the dealer -respondent has been providing service of job workers, which prior to 10 -9 -2004 was exempted under Notification No. . It has further been found that the service of job workers was brought within the domain of Service Tax with effect from 10 -9 -2004, which amount was paid by the dealer -respondent on 25 -1 -2007 along with interest. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the aforesaid amount deposited by the dealer -respondent. It has also been concluded that in the facts and circumstances there was no willful mis -statement or suppression of facts on the part of the dealer -respondent to evade tax, which is necessary for invoking the provisions of Section 76 and 78 of the Finance Act. The Tribunal has also extended the benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act, which says that notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of Section 76 or 78 of the Finance Act, no penalty is to be imposed on the dealer -respondent for any failure referred to in those provisions. The only condition is that an assessee shall show a reasonable cause for the said failure. The Tribunal has accepted the explanation of the dealer -respondent that there was notification which granted exemption in respect of production of goods on behalf of the client of the dealer -respondent and which was brought within the domain of Service Tax only with effect from 10 -9 -2004. Accordingly, it has been held that it was not a fit case for imposition of penalty under Section 76 or 78 of the Finance Act.

(3.) DISMISSED .