2017 (12) TMI 1501

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see Mr. Madrupsaran, AR, Mr. Naveen Kushalappa, AR - For the Revenue ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 29.6.2012 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has set aside the penalty imposed under the Section 76 but does not drop the penalty under Section 78 categorically. Against the same impugned order, the Department ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ommissioner also imposed penalty under Section 76 and also penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act and also imposed penalty under Section 77. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (A) and the Commissioner (A) has observed that penalties under Section 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 cannot be simultaneously imposed and he dropped the penalty imposed unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....us corporate entities under contract. It is observed that the appellant had been filing ST-3 returns regularly. The details of gross value of services was being disclosed in the returns and full details of receipts were available in the final accounts. Hence, there is no ground to conclude that there was suppression or mis-representation of facts to evade tax. Accordingly, resort to Section 78 for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....licated nature of levy in their case and there is no intention to evade tax. He further submitted that the penalty under Section 76 is imposable if there is a default in the payment of service tax. The learned AR also submitted that the order of the Commissioner (A) setting aside the penalty under Section 78 is not correct. 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of....