Notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of Section 76, 77 or 78, no penalty shall be imposable on the assessee for any failure referred to in the said provisions, if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure.” In other words, the assessee has to establish reasonable cause for the failure which could otherwise attract penalty under the said provisions of law. The letter dated 24th August, 2006 merely informs the Department that the appellants were not aware of the statutory provisions.
Ignorance of law can never be an excuse. Besides, the provisions of law are in force since 1994. No doubt there were some amendments to Section 78 in the year 2004, but that was not relating to the main substance of the said provision of law which deals with the penalty aspect. Besides, the records nowhere disclose that in the statement dated 13th September, 2005 of Shri Balwinder Singh, Proprietor of the appellant firm, had disclosed about absence of knowledge of law to him. Obviously, the letter dated 24th August, 2006 appears to be an afterthought. Even otherwise, as observed above, mere ignorance of law cannot be an excuse.
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
COURT NO.I
Service Tax Appeal No. 361 of 2010-SM
Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No.257/CE/LDH/2009 Dated: 22.12.2009
Passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Chandigarh
Date of Decision: 30.9.2010
M/s QUALITY WELDING WORKS
Vs
CCE, LUDHIANA
Appellant Rep by: Shri Harinder Singh, Adv.
Respondents Rep by: Shri S K Bhaskar, DR
