2010 (12) TMI 50

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... second proviso resulting in denial of benefit of reduced penalty to cases where payment was made within 30 days of adjudication was not applicable if penalty was not determined in accordance with the first proviso i.e. @ 25% - CEA No.177 of 2010 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 21-12-2010 - Adarsh Kumar Goel and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. JUDGEMENT Per: Adarsh Kumar Goel: 1. This appeal has been prefer .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issuance of show cause notices dated 20.10.2005 and 31.1.2006 alleging violation of Rule 6(7) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 on account of suppression of 'basic fare'. The adjudicating authority passed order in original dated 9.6.2006, creating demand of service tax and also imposing penalty. However, it was observed that the payment already made be appropriated. On appeal, the Tribunal held that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It was further held that second proviso resulting in denial of benefit of reduced penalty to cases where payment was made within 30 days of adjudication was not applicable if penalty was not determined in accordance with the first proviso i.e. @ 25%. The revenue is not shown to have questioned the view taken in the said judgments at any higher level. 5. The view taken by the Tribunal being cons .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X