9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (12) TMI 517X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order-in-appeal dated 10-5-06. 2. The issue involved in this case is regarding the service tax liability on the appellants in respect of the services provided by them as On Line information as Data Base Access and retrieval services. The appellants had obtained registration as provider of this particular services in October, 2001. They were filing the service tax returns and paying the servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red with the findings of the adjudicating authority. 3. The authorized representative appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that they are not challenging the Service tax liability and the interest liability. It is their submission that their challenge is towards the imposition of penalties. He submits that, having paid the Service tax liability and interest before 30-10-04, they were cov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llected by him. 5. Considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the record. The appellant has not appealed against the Service tax liability or the interest thereof, hence that part of impugned order is upheld. It is their submission that they are against imposition of penalty under Sections 76 and 78. I find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide letter dated 23-9-04. Under this scheme, any service provider who got registered up to 30-10-2004 are not liable for any penal action. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that in view of the immunity from penal action under this Extra Ordinary Tax Payer Friendly Scheme, no penalty is imposable on the respondents, as they have paid service tax prior to 30-10-04. The contention of the Revenue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
