2007 (11) TMI 82

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... challenges the order dated 15.4.2007 setting-aside the penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority on the respondent under Sections 76 and 78 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. 2.The appellant was engaged in providing services of mandap keeper.  According to the Revenue, the services were provided in a surreptitious manner and bills of lesser amount than the actual amount charged ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Punjab and Haryana by its decision reported in 2006 (4) STR 177 and, therefore, the very basis on which the impugned order was made does not exist. 4.In the context of the provisions of Section 11 AC which is similar to the provisions of Section 78 of the said Act, the Supreme Court has held in Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar Vs. Union of India, reported in 1999 (112) ELT 772(SC) that levy of penal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entive staff of the Central Excise Commissionerate visited the premises of the respondent and detected the breaches committed involving the said amount of service tax.  Obviously, therefore, the provisions of Sections 76 and 78 were clearly attracted and unless any reasonable ground was made out under Section 80, penalty was required to be imposed.  There was no reasonable ground for non....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uance of show cause notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 will not necessarily negate the situation mentioned therein.  This would mean that if the duty is deposited prior to the issuance of the show cause notice, there would not be any automatic waiver of penalty. 7.It transpires from the record that, the respondent had suppressed the charges and also the number of func....