9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntire tax liability along with interest as appropriated in the adjudication order. The invocation of longer period is invoked only in respect of short payment of tax pertaining to the month of February 2007. The plea of bonafide of appellant merits consideration when the entire tax liability along with interest stands discharged. Therefore, the quantum of penalty imposed under Section 78 is reduce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der, the Commissioner (Appeals) though set aside the penalty of ₹ 5000/- under Section 77, but has upheld the imposition of penalty under Section 78 invoking longer period, on the ground that service tax payment for the month of February 2007 was paid only in the year 2011 and held that element of suppression cannot be ruled out in this case. He submits that the appellant-company had filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nalty of ₹ 10,080/- against the total tax demand of ₹ 34,685/-is already reduced one is not correct as there was no dispute on payments for April 2008 and May 2008. Therefore, he pleads for setting aside the penalty under Section 78. 3. Shri L. Paneerselvam, A.C, Ld. A.R appearing for respondent-revenue reiterated the impugned order. 4. After hearing both sides, and on perusal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
