2017 (3) TMI 658

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant Mr. Sanjay Jain (DR) for the Respondent ORDER The appellant is aggrieved by the order in revision dated 31.08.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-II. The brief facts relevant to the present case are that the appellant who are engaged in the manufacture of cement, arranged finance through external commercial borrowing from foreign country. For such mobilization ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ection 78. Accordingly, the said penalty was imposed in the impugned order. 2. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that full service tax liability along with interest has been paid by the appellant, on being pointed out. The proceedings against the appellant itself should have been concluded in terms of Section 73(3). The notice, though issued within normal period, alleged fra....

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 had paid full service tax liability along with interest on being pointed out. However, the present dispute is only with reference to imposition of equal amount of penalty on the appellant for non-payment of service tax in time. We have perused the SCN and the findings of the impugned order. The allegation in the notice for imposing penalty under Section 78 did not bring out any evide....