2016 (12) TMI 997

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....his Appeal has been filed by the appellant against Order-in-Appeal No. 20/DIB/CE(A)/GHY/12 dated  24.07.2012 and ROM Order No.01/ROM/DIB/CE(A)/GHY/12 dated 16.08.2012 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals), Guwahati as First Appellate Authority. Under the above orders First Appellate Authority has allowed the appeal filed by the department by enhancing penalty by Rs. 43,819/- under Section 78 of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... case records. 5. The issue involved in the present appeal is whether penalty of Rs. 43,819/-enhanced by First Appellate Authority under OIA dated 24.07.2012, read with ROM order dated 16.08.2012, is sustainable or not. 6. It is observed that Adjudicating Authority imposed penalty of Rs. 23,219/- upon the appellant under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 against which appellant did....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thority and the appeal filed by Revenue. Therefore, First Appellate Authority has gone beyond the scope of the proceedings to hold liability of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Revenue has not filed any appeal against OIA dated 24.07.2012 and ROM order dated 16.08.2012 to contest that Commissioner(Appeals) has wrongly upheld imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance A....