TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 875
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....opadhyay, Authorized Representative for the Respondent (s) ORDER The Appellant is in Appeal assailing the order of the Ld.Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Haldia Commissionerate [Acting as Commissioner(Appeal)], Kolkata, whereby he has allowed the Appeal filed by the Department and imposed penalty of Rs.1,000/- under Section 77 and penalty of Rs.12,23,525/- (equal to the Service Tax demand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the adjudication order and the Appellant had paid Rs.2,76,364/- towards the liability of interest. The Adjudicating authority however refrained from imposing any penalty by applying Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Department was in appeal before the First Appellate Authority praying for imposition of penalties and the Appeal of the Department was allowed and penalties were imposed. Being ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ors, which is subsequently sold and in the said case of Charanjeet Singh Khanuja, it was held that no Service Tax is leviable on the said component. I further note that it was held in the said case of Charanjeet Singh Khanuja that the distributor is required to pay Service Tax on the commission earned by it on the basis of volume of purchase of Amway products made by its sales group, i.e. the grou....