2010 (11) TMI 837

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anasekaran, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. The demands confirmed are pertaining to both for the normal period of limitation as well as for the extended period in all these four cases. The appellants have paid the entire tax demand as well as the interest thereon. Penalties have been imposed under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 for non-filing of the retu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rd the learned SDR who states that since the appellants have not challenged the applicability of longer period of limitation in respect of the demanded tax amount, the penalty is imposable under Section 78. However, in regard to the normal period of limitation and the claim for limiting the penalty to 25%, he leaves it to the Bench for taking an appropriate decision. 5. Since the appellant....