2008 (12) TMI 336

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... filed the present appeals against the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein he has reduced the penalty under section 76 from Rs. 86,738 to Rs. 15,000 and Rs. 75,049 to Rs. 10,000 in respect of two different Orders-in-Original under consideration. 2. Ld. SDR on behalf of the Revenue submitted that section 76 is unambiguous and does not provide any liberty to the officers deciding the cas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... v. CCE [2006] 5 STT 377 (Chennai - CESTAT) 3. CCE v. T. Stanes & Co. Ltd. [2008] 15 STT 363 (Chennai - CESTAT) 4. Identity Advertising Associates v. CCE [2007] 10 STT 91 (Bang. - CESTAT) 5. CCE v. Punjab National Bank [2008] 16 STT 243 (New Delhi - CESTAT) 6. CCE & C v. D.R. Gade [2008] 16 STT 249 (Bom.) 3. Several decisions have been cited by the ld. Chartered Accountant on behalf of the re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X