9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1046X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is true that the appellant has put up its claim from October, 1998 to August, 2000. Since period of limitation is six months, rejection of the entire claim concluded by the Appellate Tribunal is erroneous and therefore, the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is liable to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted to the file of the Appellate Tribunal for considering the last portion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... along with a working sheet, wherein the respondent has been directed to pay Service Tax to the tune of ₹ 3,12,470. In pursuance of the said show cause notice, the order-in-original has been passed on 24-10-2001 by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai Division. The same has been challenged before the Commissioner of Appeal, wherein a portion of the demand has been accepted an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice tax based on the comments of the lower appellate authority to waive the penalties? (b) Section 80 of the Act allows waiver of penalty under Sections 76 to 79 of the Act, if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure. If such a reasonable cause to waive penalty imposed under Section 78 is used to set aside the entire demand, which is not the intention of la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... August, 2000 is not barred by limitation and the Appellate Tribunal has rejected the claim of the appellant in toto. Under the said circumstances, the final order passed in Final Order No. 255/09, dated 12-3-2009 is liable to be modified. 6. In fact, this Court has seen the entire final order passed in Final Order No. 255/09, dated 12-3-2009, wherein it has been specifically held that the entir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
