2009 (9) TMI 553

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nil Kumar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order (Oral)]. - This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 162(RKS)ST/JPR-I/07 dated 19-9-07 by which the order of the original authority demanding service tax of Rs. 1,14,586/- along with interest and imposition of penalty of Rs. 1,14,586/- under Section 76, Rs. 1,14,568/- under Section 78, Rs. 500/- under Section 77 of the Finance....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that they entertained bona fide belief that service tax was not payable during the period October, 2004 to December, 2004 cannot be accepted at all. He relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Jaipur-I v. Science Center reported in 2008 (9) S.T.R. 138 (Tri.-Del.), UOI v. Dharamendra Textile Processors reported in 2008 (231) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), Assistant Commissioner of Central E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... were facing financial crisis especially in the initial stage of introduction of service. I find that penalty of Rs. 1,14,586/- has been imposed under Section 76 as well as under Section 78 separately. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, separate penalty under Section 78 may not be warranted. The decisions relied upon by the learned DR are mainly relating to Customs Act and Central E....