9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1928X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty considered existence of reasonable cause to exonerate the appellant from levy of penalty – Found no deliberate intention to cause evasion; no penalty should be levied – Adjudication order restored and decided in favour of the Appellant. - ST/40273/2014 - FINAL ORDER NO. 41268 / 2015 - Dated:- 22-9-2015 - Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member For the Petitioner : Shri J. Shankararaman, Adv. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was the subject matter of dispute, the appellant was exonerated from levy of penalty under Section 76, 77, 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. It was held in the Adjudication order that in so far as the levy of penalty against the appellant on Mandap Keeper Service is concerned that would cause unreasonable hardship to the appellant. There was no levy of penalty on the Renting of Immovable Property Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant from the levy of penalty. The manner Adjudicating authority has recorded his finding in para 8 of his order that does not warrant penalty. But that failed to get appreciation by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for no reason recorded by him. In absence of any finding that there was deliberate intention to cause evasion, no penalty should be levied. 5. In view of the above, Adjudication ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
