2016 (11) TMI 1292

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Appellant Mr. N. Jagadish, A.R. For the Respondent ORDER The present appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 592/2012 dated 30.10.2012 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Mysore. 2. Briefly, the facts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Aluminium Extrusions falling under Chapter 760421 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of entire amount of service tax. Thereafter, vide Order-in-Original dated 30.09.2011, penalty under Section 76; equivalent penalty of Rs. 1,90,186/- under Section 78 and further penalty of Rs. 5000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 was imposed on the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the Order-in-Original exce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aid Section does not give any power to such officer to issue a show-cause notice in respect of the tax so paid and such issuance of show-cause notice is sans force of law and accordingly, not sustainable and tenable. The learned counsel relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of South India Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. & S.T. reported in 2016-TIOL-2294-CESTAT-BANG wherein in the simil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-Ahmd.)] 6. On the other hand, the learned A.R. submitted that the appellant is guilty of suppression of facts as he failed to inform the Department regarding availment of irregular Cenvat credit and, therefore, the lower authority has rightly imposed the penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 7. After considering the submissions by both the parties and perusal of the provisions ....