9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 670X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, that attains finality. - Thus, the impugned order is set-aside. appeal is allowed. - ST/10144 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 8-3-2013 - Mr. M.V. Ravindaran, J. For the Appellant: Shri Paritosh Gupta, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri K.N. Joshi, A.R. JUDGEMENT Per : Mr. M.V. Ravindaran; This stay petition is filed for the waiver of amount of penalty of Rs 4,81,620/- imposed by the first appellate authority under the provisions of Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. After hearing both sides for some time on the stay petition, I find that the issue lies in a narrow compass and hence, after allowing the application for the waiver of pre-deposit of penalties involved, I take up the appeal for d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enalty under section 78, has come the conclusion only on the grounds that adjudicating authority has not discussed the reasons for granting waiver of the penalties proposed under various sections, by invoking Section 80. On the other hand, perusal of the adjudicating authority s order and more specifically paragraph 24, where he states the reasons and conclusion for invoking the provisions of Section 80, which I may reproduce below:- 24. Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 provides that if the service provider proves that there was reasonable cause for the failure referred to Section 76, 77 78, no penalty shall be imposable on the service provider. Thus, the Section 80 has overrides the effect of Section 76, 77 and 78. In order t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts and circumstances of each case, we do not find in the order Annexure-B, the Commissioner proceeded to levy the penalty referred to above on an erroneous impression that he is not required to levy penalty of Rs. 100/- per day, A reading of the order Annexure -B indicates to us that he has exercised the power conferred on him under Sec. 80 of the Act having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. However, the said order was reviewed by the Commissioner on the basis that the minimum of Rs. 100/- per day was required to be levied for delay in filing the returns and paying service tax. The Tribunal, in the order from which this Civil Petition arises, has taken the view that the Commissioner was not justified in reviewing the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
