9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (12) TMI 54X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the service provider to them - no fault can be found on the reliance placed by the Comm. (A) on the certificate - Rule 15(1) not applicable to present case, there is no warrant to interfere with the reduction in penalty - ST/471/2007-SM(BR) - 1834/2007-SM(BR)/(PB), - Dated:- 18-12-2007 - Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President [Order].- 1. I have heard both the sides on the appeal of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Central Excise Rules, 2001, which clearly prohibit production of additional evidence before the Commissioner (Appeals). However, I find that disallowing the credit on security services was on the ground that some of the services had been provided at the residence and such amount disallowed was paid by the respondents and even the adjudicating authority had disallowed the credit of Rs.50,541/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esent case as it is this rule, which deals with taking of credit in respect of input services. Rule 15(3) provides that the penalty cannot be in excess of Rs.10,000/-. Furthermore, if at all any one would have been aggrieved that the penalty had exceeded Rs.10,000/-, it would be assessee and not the Revenue. Since the provisions of Rule 15(1) are not applicable to the facts of the present case, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
