9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - order is being issued pursuant to and in compliance of the order dated 3.11. 2014 of Punjab and Haryana High Court which duly takes note of the fact that as per the judgements of the same High Court in the case of First Flight Courier Ltd [2011 (1) TMI 52 - High Court of Punjab and Haryana] and M/s. Akash Cable [2011 (2) TMI 80 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA], even if the penalties under Sections 76 and 78 could be imposed simultaneously during the relevant period, penalty under Section76 would not be justified when penalty under Section 78 is imposed - Penalty u/s 76 is set aside - Penalty u/s 78 is upheld - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/770/2009-CU[DB] - - - Dated:- 18-6-2015 - G Raghuram, President And R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 006 is concerned. ii I impose a penalty of two hundred rupees for every day during which failure to pay service tax continued or at the rate of two percent of such tax, per month, whichever is higher, starting with the first day after the due date till the date of actual payment of the outstanding amount of service tax in terms of Section 75 of the Act for the period 19.04.2006 onwards; iii I impose a penalty of ₹ 1,000.00 on the Noticee under Section 77 of the Act. iv I impose a penalty of ₹ 3,97,406.00 on the Noticee under Section 78 of the Act Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the CESTAT. We have heard counsel for the parties. While considering the scope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocate of the appellant has contended that it is not a case warranting imposition of any penalty as there was no wilful misstatement or suppression of facts on the part of the appellant. It is further contended that in any case, simultaneous penalties under Section76 and Section 78 of the Finance Act 1994 should not have been imposed and option should have been given for deposit of 25% of the mandatory penalty within 30 days. 4. The Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand stated that even though the appellant had deposited the impugned service tax before the issuance of the show cause notice, the investigations had begun much earlier and it was only when the appellant realised that the investigations will bring out the Service T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... smuch as the BCCI appeals were summarily dismissed. Further, it is to be noted that this order is being issued pursuant to and in compliance of the order dated 3.11. 2014 of Punjab and Haryana High Court which duly takes note of the fact that as per the judgements of the same High Court in the case of First Flight Courier Ltd and M/s. Akash Cable referred to therein, even if the penalties under Sections 76 and 78 could be imposed simultaneously during the relevant period, penalty under Section76 would not be justified when penalty under Section 78 is imposed. In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise versus Pannu Property Dealers, Ludhiana - 2011 (24) S.T.R. 173 (P H) (P H) Punjab and Haryana High Court reiterated the same view even tho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
