TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 635
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The above MA has been filed by the appellant seeking to condone the delay in complying with the Tribunal's Final Order No.40609/2017 dated 07.04.2017. 2. On behalf of the appellant, Ld. Counsel Shri M. Karthikeyan appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that the order impugned confirmed a total service tax demand of Rs. 22,59,839/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondoned. The delay was only because the appellant company was a sick unit and had registered under BIFR which itself is evident to establish that the appellant was facing financial crisis. If the delay is not condoned, appellant would be liable to entire penalty of Rs. 22,59,839/- which would be a very heavy burden on the appellant. 3. Ld. A.R Shri B. Balamurugan opposes the application. He submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated to a point that they have had applied to BIFR for financial rehabilitation, I hold that there is a case for granting partial reduction of the penalty amount. Accordingly, the penalty amount is reduced to Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees six lakhs only) under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, subject to their paying up this reduced penalty within a period of three months from the date of receipt of t....