2014 (12) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Aravindan, Advocate, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been directed against the Final Order No. 241/2012 in Appeal No. ST/221/2011, dated 13-3-2012 by the CESTAT, Chennai. 2. The respondent herein has issued a show cause notice dated 15-10-2009, wherein a specific demand has been made to the effect that the appellant/assessee should pay service tax, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. Before considering the rival submissions made on either side, narration of the following facts is very much essential. It is an admitted fact that the appellant is liable to pay service tax. It is also a settled principle of law that as per Sections 76 and 70 of the Finance Act, 1994, the Department is entitled to levy penalty as well as interest under the circumstances mentioned therein.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er with interest and for invoking Section 80 of the said Act, the Appellate Tribunal has not given any opportunity and further in Section 80 of the said Act, it has been specifically stated to the effect that if any assessee has shown sufficient reason, penalty cannot be imposed. Under the said circumstances, the entire order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is erroneous and the same is liable to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her under Section 76 or under Section 78 of the said Act? 7. The Appellate Tribunal has categorically held that the appellant/assesses is liable to pay penalty under Section 76. 8. As rightly pointed out on the side of the appellant/assesses, against the order passed in Original as well against the order passed by the Commissioner of Appeals, no appeal has been preferred by the Dep....