9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l stage of implementation. The very name of the service viz “Business Auxiliary Service” does not give any clarity and the entry covered different types of activities. So there was confusion in the minds of people about the actual scope of such service. For that reason, the appellant was not able to claim the Service Tax amount from the HDFC Bank and consequently there was some delay in remitting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 003 to 10-9-2004. The Revenue issued a show cause notice on 8-6-2005. The appellant paid the Service Tax along with interest on 5-7-2005, 7-11-2005 and 29-5-2006. On adjudication, tax demanded was confirmed along with interest and penalties. The tax and interest already paid was appropriated and the adjudicating authority waived penalty on the appellants by invoking powers under Section 80 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ginal authority had taken into account this position and waived penalty invoking the power under Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeals) should not have imposed penalty reversing the decision of adjudicating authority. 3. Learned AR for Revenue submits that even after the department advised the appellant in May 2005 to pay the Service Tax in question, they took considerable t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to invoke powers under Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994. The Adjudicating Authority rightly did so and there was no reason to reverse such order and impose penalty on the appellant. Therefore, we allow the appeal by setting aside the penalty imposed on the appellants by the impugned order. The appeal is allowed to that extent. (Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court) - - TaxTMI - TM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
