2017 (2) TMI 846

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e matter to the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad to consider the legality and validity of the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority imposing penalty under Section 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 as imposed by the Adjudicating Authority on the entire amount of tax demand ie., Rs. 52,57,748/=, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the present Tax Appeal is taken up for final hearing today. 3. Facts leading to the present Appeal in nutshell are as under : 3.1 That there was a service tax demand of Rs. 52,57,748/= under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 73 [2] thereof and Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 against the appellant herei....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....] under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Adjudicating Authority also imposed penalty of Rs. 52,57,748/= on Messrs. SCI International Securities Limited [appellant herein] under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 3.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the orderin- original passed by the adjudicating authority, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as, "the CESTAT"]. It appears that at the time of hearing the appeal before the learned CESTAT, no body remained present on behalf of the appellant-assessee, and therefore, the learned Tribunal proceeded ex parte and heard the appeal ex parte on the basis of material a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and while disposing of the Appeal and passing of an Order dated 3rd November 2015, there is no discussion with respect to penalty imposed under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 with respect to the remaining amount of Rs. 47,68,300/= and therefore, it was requested to restore the Appeal to consider the dispute with respect to the penalty imposed under Sections 76 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 on the remaining balance amount of Rs. 47,68,300/=. That, again without deciding the said question, the learned Tribunal has rejected the Rectification of Mistake Application, giving rise to the present Appeal by the appellant. 4. Having heard learned counsel Shri Dhaval Shah appearing on behalf of the appellant and Shri Ankit Shah, learn....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....extent, the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal deserves to be quashed and set-aside and the matter is required to be remanded to the learned CESTAT to decide and dispose of the Appeal qua legaltiy and validity of the order in original passed by the Adjudicating Authority imposing penalties under Section 76 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 on the remaining amount of Rs. 47,68,300/= also. 6. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeal succeeds in part. The impugned judgment and order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad in Appeal No. ST/79/2007 is hereby quashed and set-aside and the matter is remanded to the learned Tribunal to consid....