9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nor did he deposit the service tax. The appellants discharged the service tax liability for the whole period in dispute on their own on 9th May, 2003 and 13th May, 2003 along with interest. Show cause notices were issued on 13th May, and 14th May, 2003 for imposition of penalty on them under Section 76 and 77 of Finance Act, 1994. The said show cause notices were adjudicated by the Asst. Commissioner and he imposed penalty of Rs. 1,000/- each against each show cause notice and also penalties as under :- Appeal No. Penalty imposed 0.1.0. 196/05 & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; Penalty amount O.I.A. 196/05 22175 197/05 41640 198/05 & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the other hand submits that the Commissioner by power vested on him under Section 84 and has correctly reviewed the order and enhanced the penalty that is imposable under Section 76, as the penalty imposable. Under Section 76 is the minimum penalty and it is not the maximum penalty. It is the submission that the appellants cannot be granted the benefit of Extra Ordinary Tax Payer Friendly Scheme as introduced by the Government, as that scheme was for the people who were not registered and want to pay the service tax voluntarily. 5. Considered the submissions made by both sides. I find that the appellants paid the entire amount of service tax and interest thereon on 9-5-2003 and 13-5-2003. Subsequently on adjudication they have also paid a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
