2018 (2) TMI 78

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Respondent. ORDER Per Bench The issue in this appeal concerns demand of service tax liability on GTA services availed by the appellant for transportation of mined iron ores within and outside the mining area. The proceedings initiated against the appellant culminated in demand of service tax liability of Rs. 2,89,48,762/- along with interest liability thereof and imposition of penalty....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gned order. He placed reliance on the ratio of the following judgments in support of his contention: 1. CCE, Chandigarh Vs. M/s. Stesalit Ltd. - 2017-TIOL-84-SC-CX 2. Dhandayuthapani Canteen Vs. Cestat, Chennai - 2015 (39) STR 386 (Mad.) 4. Heard both sides and have gone through the case records. 5. Discernibly, there was lack of clarity on the issue in dispute till it was clarified by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the appellant should not be penalised with an amount equal to the duty determined as envisaged under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. In any case, under the Finance Act as it stood at the period of dispute, Section 80 ibid was a special provision to waive the penalties otherwise imposable under Sections 76, 77 and 78 ibid, if there is reasonable cause for the failure to discharge service....