2004 (1) TMI 2

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it of penalty of Rs. 32,700/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 and the appeal arose out of the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order. 2. After hearing both sides for a while, it is decided to waive the pre-deposit of penalty and take up the appeal itself for consideration. 3. Briefly the facts are that the appellant is a charitable organisation engaged in several activities which are m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... obtaining registration, the appellants filed returns for the period thereafter and paid service tax. However, for the period prior to September 1998 they filed returns on 15-1-1999 as detailed in the appeal memorandum. The appellants, on filing returns for the period prior to September 1998, not only paid service tax but also paid interest on the delayed payment of the service tax. The original au .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nal in the case of Palika Palace v. CCE, Chandigarh - 2001 (134) E.L.T. 677 (T) = 2001 (47) RLT 182 (CEGAT-Del.) took the view that Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 provides that no penalty shall be imposable for any failure of the provisions of Section 77 if the assessee proves that there was reasonable case for the said failure. The appellants' main activity is not Mandap keeping. It is o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X