2009 (2) TMI 108

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sanjeev Kaushik, Sr. Standing Counsel (Indirect Taxes), for Appellant Per Justice M.M. Kumar : The revenue has challenged order dated 31.3.2008, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity, 'the Tribunal') by invoking Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 (for brevity, 'the Act'). It has been claim....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 84 of the Act by raising it to Rs. 31,652/-. The Commissioner also recorded the finding that the assessee had suppressed the value of taxable service. However, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner passed in exercise of revisional power and restored the order-in-original by observing that leniency shown by the original authority in terms of Section 80 of the Act did not suffer f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng jurisdiction to impose the penalty. Accordingly, the Assessing Authority exercised the power under Section 80 of the Act and decided not to impose any penalty under Section 78. There was no basis for the Revisional Authority-cum-Commissioner to acquire the jurisdiction to impose penalty. There is no evidence produced before the revisional authority or any other authority to prove fraud, collusi....