2008 (9) TMI 229

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt. [Order]. - In this application filed by M/s. Anand Agencies, the appellants have sought waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of a penalty above Rs. 2.25 lakhs imposed on them in a revisional order passed by the Commissioner. The applicant is registered as a service provide under the category of C & F. Agent. During the period 2001-02 to 2004-05 the appellant did not pay service tax on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty under Section 76 was the discretion of the adjudicating authority. Once the discretion had been exercised and no arbitrariness was pointed out, it would not be possible for the Court to interfere. He also cites the following judicial authorities in support. (a) The Financers v. CCE, Jaipur -2007 (8) S.T.R. 7 (Tri.-Del.) (b) CCE v. SilverOakGardens Resort - 2008 (9) S.T.R. 481 (Tri.-Del.) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sidered the facts of the case and the submissions The judgment of the Karnataka High Court relied on by the ld JDR does not advance the revenue's case In that case, the Tribunal had, in reducing the penalty under Section 76, relied on decisions of the Supreme Court and Delhi Bench of the Tribunal which had no application to the factual situation of the case before it. Therefore, the Hon'ble High C....