2007 (6) TMI 520

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tax along with interest and even though the amnesty scheme did not provide for non-imposition of penalty - penalty reduced.
K.K. AGARWAL, TECHNICAL MEMBER J.P. Doshi for the Appellant. U.H. Jadhav for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The short matter involved in this appeal is regarding reduction in penalty which was enhanced by Commissioner (Appeals) from ₹ 1,000 to ₹ 1,02,581 on the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ubts regarding leviability of tax on Architects and similar default by other have been condoned and penalty waived by looking into the amnesty scheme introduced by the Government in the year 2004. 3. Learned D.R. however submits that the minimum penalty prescribed under section 76 is ₹ 100 per day only and this has been held by the Larger Bench in the case of ETA Engg. Ltd. v. CCE 2004 (174 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... along with interest and even though the amnesty scheme did not provide for non-imposition of penalty, a consistent view has been taken by the Tribunal that in such cases penalty is not called for once the entire amount along with interest has been paid, I reduce the penalty from ₹ 1,12,581 to ₹ 20,000 only. 5. Appeal is disposed of in above terms.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X