2013 (11) TMI 1360

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Finance Act, 1994. Section 76 provides penalty for failure to collect or pay service tax while Section 77 provides penalty for failure to furnish prescribed returns. 2. The Tribunal set aside the order passed by the First Appellate Authority namely the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) dated 25-11-2003 where by the order dated 11-10-2002 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Service Tax (Sales), Bangalore in Original Order No.18/2002 was upheld. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent though served. 4. We have perused the order passed by the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs.5 ,20,000 /- to Rs.1,00,000/-. The relevant observations in paragraph 3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ced reliance upon the order dated 19-11-2004 passed in Final Order No.1859/2004 for reducing the penalty from Rs.3,03,300/- to Rs.50,000/-. The relevant observations made by this Court in the order dated 25-07-2007 whereby the order dated 19-11-2004 in Final Order No.1859/2004 was set aside read thus:    "Section 80 sub-section (2) of the Income Tax Act mandates the respondent herein to pay Service Tax. It is an undisputed fact that Service Tax could not be paid within the stipulated time so also returns were not submitted by the respondent. The reasons assigned for not having paid the Service Tax was that there was unrest in the factory, which started from October 1998 to May 1999. in this regard, the notification issued by the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....labour unrest is accepted by the Assessing Authority as the same was evidenced by the Government order of prohibiting the strike. For that period the penalty is not levied by the Assessing Authority. The said finding of fact is affirmed by the first Appellate Authority in its order. No doubt, he has not assigned reasons. Nonetheless, the order of penalty imposed is accepted by him. The same is in conformity with the reasons assigned by the Assessing Authority. The second Appellate Tribunal was not right in setting aside the same by following the decision of the Supreme Court and its own decision of the Delhi Bench and the same is in contravention of the material on record on the basis of which the finding is recorded by the original authori....