2013 (1) TMI 296

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bility of the assessee. Further, when the department wanted the assessee to be penalised under the provisions invoked in the show-cause notice, again, it was incumbent on the appellate authority to consider the plea and, in the event of the assessee being found liable to any such penalty, determine the quantity of the penalty. None of these is forthcoming in this case. With request to the Commissi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 and interest thereon under Section 75 of the Act and had also proposed penalties on the party under Sections 76 and 78 of the Act, the original authority confirmed demand to the extent of Rs. 56,510/-with interest thereon against the assessee, and appropriated their full payments towards the demands so confirmed, but refrained from imposing any penalty on them. The or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s of the Act having been invoked by the Commissioner (Appeals). The absence of mention Section 77 in the impugned order is justifiable though, in as much as this provision was not invoked in the show-cause notice. 3. When the department wanted the tax liability of the assessee to be revised, it was incumbent on the appellate authority to record a clear finding and to spell out in quantitative te .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X