9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue involved in both is one and the same. 3.The brief facts of the case are that the assessee M/s. Aarti Advertising, 8, Giridhar Sankul, Krishna Nagar Panchavati Nasik, are engaged in providing services of Advertising services having Service Tax Registration to comply with the conditions prescribed in the Service Tax Rules, 1944 is provided in Service Tax network. It appears that the assessee had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -Notice by the Adjudicating authority. Whereas the penalty amount which was confirmed by the adjudicating authority was paid on 23-3-2004. The Department has accepted all the payments and there is no any mala fide intention in protest even before receipt of the penalty amount. Later on Commissioner (Revision) has called for record of Assistant Commissioner and issued the Show-Cause-Notice dated 24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f S.J. Anthony v. C.C.E., Bangalore-II - 2006 (1) S.T.R. 154 (T), wherein it is observed that if the adjudicating authority had exercised discretion in imposing the penalty with reference to the facts of the case, but there was no justification for the Review authority to enhance the penalty on the ground that Section 76 prescribes minimum penalty of Rs. 100/- everyday. Next he relied upon the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re. 6.As seen from the facts of the case, the assessee to shows bona fide had made the payment well in time before issuing the Show-Cause-Notice and after confirming the penalty amount. Two years have (sic) proceeding were closed the Commissioner (Revl.) had exercised his jurisdiction in issuing the Show-Cause-Notice and adjudicating thereupon. This amounts to rather different facing nefarious pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
