TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (6) TMI 94
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Samir Chitkara, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Service Tax of Rs. 10,05,374/- stands confirmed against the appellant alongwith imposition of penalty of identical amount under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 and of Rs. 200/- per day in terms of Section 76 of the said Act. 2. The appellant is manufacturer of excisable goods and holds the Service Tax Regis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edings were initiated against the appellant for denial of the abatement on the ground that the said condition do not stand fulfilled. The appellants were not able to produce any evidence showing as to the service provider has not availed the credit or benefit of Notification No. 12/03, the original adjudicating authority confirmed the demand against them and also imposed penalty. They have also re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Tribunal. The benefit of the Notification would become available only and only when the condition are satisfied. Having admitted that such conditions have not been satisfied, we do not find any justifiable reason to grant unconditional stay. The various decisions relied upon by the learned Advocate are to the effect that some sort of evidence either by way of declaration or certificate were pr....