9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 334X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. PII/AV/39/2011 dated 29.4.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-II. 2. Heard both side and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records, it transpires that the appellant is engaged in the activity of supply of temporary labourers to various service recipients. Appellant took registra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble value. The tax liability has been re-worked out by the first appellate authority and he also set aside some of the tax liability, which was beyond the period of limitation. The first appellate authority modified the order to the extent that the tax liability is reduced from Rs. 36,15,934/- to Rs. 16,25,417/- along with interest and also reduced the penalty accordingly under Section 78 and uphe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o that all the reliefs which were claimed before the first appellate authority were extended, has not made any case for setting aside penalties.
5. We find that the impugned order is a well reasoned order; considered the entire facts of the case in its correct perspective. We do not find any reason to interfere in such a reasoned order.
6. The appeal filed by the appellant is rejected. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
