9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication from the Revenue which was not responded. He also recorded that there was no suppression on the part of the respondents. - appeal filed by the Revenue rejected. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilability of said exemption notification had availed the benefit of said exemption notification. Even at the time of submission of quarterly returns no query was raised with the Appellants regarding amount shown as Amount billed for Exempted services . Which gives sufficient reasons in favour of the Appellants to waive the penalty imposed and accordingly the penalty imposed under Section 76 is wai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, the most important thing in the case is that there was no proposal in the show cause notice for imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Act and as there was no proposal to penalise the Appellants under Section 78 of the Act the impugned Order-in-original has gone beyond its limit by imposing penalty under Section 78. I also fully agree with the decisions cited by the Appellants wherein d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e part of the respondents. The Revenue in their memo of appeal have no where challenged that the appellant was not seeking clarifications from the Revenue. 4. Apart from the above, we note that there are many decisions holding to the effect that food items sold by an assessee are exempted from payment of Service Tax. However, as the respondents have not come in appeal the benefit of said decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
