ORDER
T. Anjaneyulu, Member (J)
1. Heard both sides. The appeal is admitted.
2. The appellant is a member of National Stock Exchange and provides services of stock broking under the name and style of Crown Consultants (P) Limited. The appellant is required to pay service tax in terms of Section 68 of the Finance Act, 1994. The business activity of the appellant started by 25th October, 1995. The law provides that within 30 days, the appellant has got to register under Service Tax Act. As a matter of fact, the appellant has applied within the period of 30 days i.e. 25th November, 1995. The registration certificate is finalized and handed over to the appellant in the last week of December, 1995. As seen from the data furnished there was no activity/business transaction in the month of October, 1995. However, there was some business in the month of November, 1995 and he has paid service tax by the calendar month ending December, 1995 on 19-1-1996 with a delay of 4 days. The appellant has been penalised to the tune of Rs. 1,328/- for late payment. It appears that the adjudicating authority has counted the delay out of for the month of November and December prior to the registration certificate. This cannot be treated as delay. Furthermore, it is observed that there existed absolutely no deliberate intention on the part of the appellant much less any mens rea in delaying the payment. The period subsequent thereto, the appellant has been regular during the last decade in payment of Service tax. This shows the appellant is punctual and prompt in making payment of Service tax.
3. In this view of the matter, I feel that the penalty imposed under the impugned order is unwarranted and is liable to be set aside and accordingly penalty is set aside. The appeal is allowed.
(Pronounced in the Court)