9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (5) TMI 22X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty not imposable - Appeal No. ST/101/2006/MAS - Final Order No. 463/2006 - Dated:- 31-5-2006 - There are two applications before me, one seeking condonation of delay of appeal and the other praying for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of an amount of penalty. The delay of the appeal is to the extent of which has been satisfactorily explained. After hearing both s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nance Act, 1994. After considering the assessee's reply to the show-cause notice, and hearing them, the original authority imposed penalties of Ks. 11,166/-, Ks. 1,000/- and Rs. 15000/- respectively under Sections 76, 77 and 78 ibid. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the Section 78 penalty to Ks. 11,242/- and maintained the rest of the decision of the lower authority. After receiving t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ai), wherein a similar penalty was set aside by the Tribunal, after noting that the tax with interest had been paid prior to adjudication of the case. It is submitted by ld. Counsel that the present case stands on a stronger footing inasmuch as, in this case, the payments were made prior to the issue of show-cause notice. The above decision was followed by the East Zonal Bench of this Tribunal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , this provision was not invoked by the department against the assessee. As the delay in filing of Return was occasioned by the delay in getting registered with the department, I am of the view that it was not correct on the part of the authorities below to penalize the party under Section 77 on the ground of delay of filing of Return. Hence, Section 77 penalty also gets vacated. 5. The impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
