TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ween November’ 06 to Aug’ 08 no amount was paid by them. They also did not file any ST - 3 Return and it was only detection by the department that they discharged the service tax liability - penalty upheld. The Appellant is eligible for 75% waiver of the penalty imposed under Section 78, rest of the demand and penalty confirmed against the Appellant is upheld. Appeal disposed off. - ST/690/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est was proposed to be adjusted against the same. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same therefore the appellant is before us. 2. Shri V.M. Chawda, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that they could not deposit the service tax as they were facing financial problems and hence due to such non-payment the ST - 3 return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. 5. We find that the Appellant was registered under service tax under the category of Manpower Supply services. However during the period 2005 to 2009 they short paid service tax and did not file returns. We find that the adjudication order dt. 12/14.12.2011 was passed confirming the service tax and penalties. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been correctly imposed. However since the service tax amount, penalty of 25% and interest stands paid within 30 days of the passing of the Order-in-Original, therefore the 75% penalty amount stands waived. 6. Accordingly, We hold that the appeal is rejected as far as imposition of penalty under section 76 and 78 is concerned. However we hold that the Appellant is eligible for 75% waiver of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|