2017 (1) TMI 712

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd of the matter - there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in directing the re-examination of the issue and remand of the matter. It is seen that the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the penalty imposed under section 78 and has given the option of reduced penalty of 25% of the service tax demand. It is settled law that penalty under section 76 and 78 cannot be s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fy the service tax payable by respondent. The penalty imposed under section 76 was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) and penalty under section 78 was reduced to 25% of service tax payable provided the respondent pays the same within 30 days from the receipt of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is the contention of department contention that the Commissioner (Appeals) ought n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is no infirmity in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in directing the re-examination of the issue and remand of the matter. 4. The second grievance raised by the department is that the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the penalty imposed under section 76 of the Finance Act. It is seen that the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the penalty imposed under section 78 and has given .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X