News Update

IT Sector urges FM to lower GST on telecom services to 12%NIC CERT launched to predict cyber attacksConnectivity with ASEAN is India's priority: GovtTreading GST Path - XXXIX - Tribunal at crossroadsST - Denial of CENVAT credit on ground of failure to deposit tax by service provider is not correct in equity when there is no express condition to that effect in CCR, 2004: CESTATI-T - Reopening of concluded assessment by invoking provision of section 147 will not fall under ambit of change of opinion where AO formed an opinion contrary to binding decision of Apex Court: ITATCus - A court is expected to make an overall assessment of fact situation and test same on touchstone of law to reach to its conclusion: CESTATVice President calls for ranking of legislatures & notifying disruptors on daily basisOnline exam portal of IAF launchedPre-Budget Meet - Economists ask FM to lower MAT & spell out roadmap for tax reformsNadda launches Operational Guidelines for HDUs & ICUsRahul Gandhi formally elected unopposed Congress President; PM congratulates him on his elevationCBDT Task Force for reviewing Income Tax Law to hold its first meeting on Dec 14, 2017NCLT Favoring takeover of Unitech Management- Apex court to hear case tomorrowRyan Row- SC Declines to repose trust in trustees in bail applicationReal Estate- ITC a double edged sword under GSTI-T - Assessees cannot avail Post decisional hearing if their case is transferred u/s 127 to some other I-T Officer located in same city: HCST - Service of taking repossession of vehicle from borrower is a part of 'security' service which is specifically included in definition of input service: CESTATCX - Tribunal, not being court of equity, it is difficult to entertain prayer of appellant for grant of interest from date of deposit made in accordance with HC order: CESTATWTO Meet in Buenos Aires - India hopeful of support on food security issueOver 15 mn girls aged between 15 to 19 experienced forced sex: UNICEF
 
CX As there is no proceeding u/s 11A(1) against appellant, benefit of proviso to 11A(2) is not available to co-noticee Penalty u/r 26 upheld: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JULY 17, 2017: IN a CE case booked against M/s. Air Carrying Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. , the appellant was a co-noticee against whom penal provisions were invoked.

The demand of duty was confirmed and penalty was imposed against the main noticee. Penalty was also imposed on appellantu/r 26 of the CER.

Aggrieved,the appellant isbefore the Tribunal.

It is submitted that the main noticee, M/s. Air Carrying Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. had paid the entire duty along with interest and 25% of penalty within 30 days of the order and consequently, in terms of Section 11A(1A) of the CEA, 1944, the proceedings against the co-noticeeget abated.

And, therefore, the penalty imposed should be dropped as rule 26 of CER should be r/w Section 11A of the CEA, 1944.

The AR supported the order.

The Single Member Bench extracted the provisions of Section 11A(1A), (2) of the CEA, 1944 and observed -

4.1 It is seen that the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11A provides that if the main noticee has paid the duty in full together with interest and penalty under sub-section (1A), the proceedings in respect of such persons and such other persons to whom notices are served under sub-section (1) shall, without prejudice to the provisions of Section 9, 9A and 9AA be deemed to be conclusive as to the matters stated herein.

Inasmuch as since in the instant case, there are no proceedings under sub-section (1) of Section 11A against the appellant, the benefit of proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11A is not available to the appellant, the CESTAT held.

The appeal was dismissed.

Missed the bus -

++ By Notification No.  8/2016-CENT  dated 1.3.2016, the Central Excise Rules were amended to add a proviso after Rule 26(1):

Provided that where any proceeding for the person liable to pay duty have been concluded under clause (a) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 11AC of the Act in respect of duty, interest and penalty, all proceedings in respect of penalty against other persons, if any, in the said proceedings shall also be deemed to be concluded .

++ Also see CBEC Circular No. 11/2016-Customs., Dated: March 15, 2016

++ Can proceedings against co-noticees be deemed to be concluded if main assessee pays duty, interest and penalty [ DDT 2110 ]

In favour:

++ 2013-TIOL-1048-CESTAT-DEL 

++ 2016-TIOL-28-CESTAT-MUM , 2013-TIOL-768-CESTAT-MUM , 2016-TIOL-855-CESTAT-MUM [All Single Member Bench decisions]

Contra view –

++ 2013-TIOL-26-CESTAT-DEL [SMB]

++ 2015-TIOL-756-CESTAT-MUM [SMB]

(See 2017-TIOL-2453-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
Shemaleup.net x-comics.org vr-porn360.net