2019 (5) TMI 975

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent Per: Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. The short issue involved in the present appeal is whether the imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is justified or otherwise. 3. The appellant during the relevant period i.eg from 1.7.2010 to 31.3.2012 provided taxable services under the category....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of penalty under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. On adjudication, the amount already paid has been appropriated and penalty under Sections 76 and 77 was imposed. Since penalty under Section 78 was not imposed by the adjudicating authority, Revenue filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The learned Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the Revenue's appeal. Hence, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Service Tax was delayed only because of confusion prevailing in the industry at the relevant point of time. He submits that therefore imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 is unwarranted. 5. Per contra, learned AR for the Revenue submits that only after visit of the officers to their premises, the appellant has discharged Service Tax. Therefore, the payment cannot b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arged much before the commencement of the investigation against them. The adjudicating authority after analyzing the evidence on record and conduct of the appellant imposed penalty under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. I do not find any reason for invoking Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and imposing penalty equivalent to the Service Tax paid by the appellant. In these circumstanc....