9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1440X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decide in Jubiliant Enpro (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Noida [2014 (12) TMI 598 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ] even if at the relevant time the penalties under Section 76 & 78 were not mutually exclusive, once penalty under Section 78 has been imposed, penalty under Section 76 ibid may not be justified. Penalty under Sections 77 and 78 ibid are upheld. However, penalty under Section 78 ibid shall be 25% of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2007, confirmed service tax demand of ₹ 17,77,604/- along with interest and penalties under Sections 76, 77 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. (ii) In respect of Show Cause Notice dated 04.10.2007, confirmed service tax demand of ₹ 7,45,157/- along with interest and penalties under Sections 76, 77 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. (iii) In respect of Show Cause Notice dated 12.02.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed order and that the penalty under Section 76 ibid should not be imposed as penalty under Section 78 ibid has been imposed. 3. We have considered the contentions of the appellant. There is no doubt that the commission paid to overseas agents by the appellant was liable to service tax under BAS and the appellant is not contesting the same. However, regarding the contention of the appellant th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id may not be justified. We also have no difficulty in agreeing with the appellants that maximum penalty under Section 77 was only ₹ 1000/-. In the light of the said judicial pronouncement, we are inclined to accept the contention of the appellant with regard to the penalty under Section 76 ibid. We also find that none of the lower authorities expressely gave the appellant option to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
