2004 (8) TMI 3

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....peal Revenue is challenging the correctness of the Order-in-Appeal No. 496/2000-C.E., dated 6-9-2000 by which the Commissioner has noted that the lower authority was not justified in imposing a huge penalty of Rs. 1,03,200/- for delayed payment of service tax of Rs. 13,731/-. He has noted that the assessee had not paid the service tax in time due to some confusion in the initial stage as it was a ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... from the judgment of  this Bench in the case of Smitha Shetty v. CCE, Bangalore [2003 (156) E.L.T. 84] that the Bench has examined this very issue in the light of the several judgments of the Tribunal and Apex Court and has come to the conclusion that when there is technical or judicial breach of the provisions of the Act or where the Breach flows from a bona fide belief that the offender is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....est or acted in conscious disregard of its obligation. It also held that penalty will not also be imposed for failure to perform the statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and on a consideration of the relevant circumstances. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has noted that the service tax was a new levy and the assessee did not know about ....