9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... testing facts of the Appellant - ST/512/2009-SM - 1544/2009-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 17-12-2009 - Shri D.N. Panda, Member (J) REPRESENTED BY : Shri P.C. Kashiv, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri I. Baig, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. Ld. Consultant Shri P.C. Kashiv vehemently opposes the penalty imposed by Appellate order under challenge. He appreciates that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant opted for registration in 2004 itself, by that time law was well settled. There was no confusion. Only due to search that was made, the Appellant came forward to undertake the liability and discharged the same. The Appellant had no bona fide at all to plead the confusion as to the levy since that does not come out from the Appellate order. Rather para-10 of the Appellate order clearly show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s conceivable, the Appellant is subjected to Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. That Section has undergone amendment from14-5-2003by insertion of a proviso to grant concession of penalty. Such provision is in similar parameter with Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. A matter under Section 11AC was before Hon ble High Court of Delhi in respect of concessional penalty. The Hon ble High Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... state the options available to the Assessee under Section 11AC of the Act. Once the choices are made known to the Assessee and it still does not take advantage of the first proviso to Section 11AC of the Act, it will be entirely at its own peril. Therefore, it would be beneficial, both from the point of view of the Revenue as well as the Assessee, if the options available to the Assessee are menti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
