2010 (8) TMI 190

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....abhat Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri K.P. Singh, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order (Oral)]. - This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 342/BPL/2009 dated 1-9-2009. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellants who is a manufacturer of MS ingots and runner and riser are also rendering services. During th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., 1994. On appeal by the party, the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the penalty imposed under Section 76. The party is in appeal against the penalties sustained by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Rs. 7,25,561/- under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rs. 1000/- under Section 77. 4.1 Learned Advocate submits that there was lot of confusion prevailing in the field regarding the sco....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... v. CCE, Chandigarh - 2009 (15) S.T.R. 439 (Tri-Del). 4.2 Alternatively, he submits that the original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) have not given option to the appellants about availability of concessional penalty of 25% and therefore, they should be allowed to pay the concessional penalty as provided under first proviso to Section 11AC in the light of the decision of the Hon'....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 6. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. There is no dispute that the appellants were liable to pay service tax as Business Auxiliary services on service charges received by them as commission agent. The claim of the appellants that they were under bona fide belief that they were not liable to pay service tax is clearly contradicted by their own act of raising bills....