9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directed to quantify and impose the penalty u/s 76 for the above period - appeal allowed by way of remand. - S. T. Appeal No. 60538 of 2013 - Final Order No. 52378 / 2018 - Dated:- 2-7-2018 - Hon ble Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) And Hon ble Ms. Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial) Sh. G. R. Singh, AR for the Revenue None for the Respondent-assessee ORDER Per : V. Padmanabhan The present appeal is filed by Revenue against the Order-in-Original No. 27/2013 dated 17.09.2013. 2. The respondent is engaged in providing various services and for payment of Service Tax they had obtained registration on 19.03.2007. Revenue investigated into the affairs of the appellant and came to the conclusion that they have failed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed for the period prior to the amendment in Section 78 carried out w.e.f. 10.05.2008. The observation of the Tribunal in the above case is reproduced below:- 7. Regarding imposition of penalty under both Sections 76 and 78, we note that the provisions of Section 78 have been amended w.e.f. 10.05.2008. The last proviso in the said section, inserted on that day stipulates that if the penalty is payable under this Section, the provisions of Section 76 shall not apply. Admittedly, this is statutory amendment and applicable prospectively. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bajaj Travels Ltd. (supra) categorically held that Section 76 and 78 operate in two different fields. The relevant portion of the order of the Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnu Property Dealers, Ludhiana [2011 (24) S.T.R.173 (P H)] has taken the view that even if the scope of two sections of the Act may be different, the fact that penalty has been levied under Section 78 could be taken into account for levying or not levying penalty under Section 76 of the Act. However, that was a case where the appellate authority had exercised its discretion not to levy the penalty under Section 76 of the Act, when the larger penalty had already been imposed under Section 78 of the Act. In this scenario, the appeal of the Revenue against the said view taken by the appellate authority was dismissed holding that appellate authority was within its jurisdiction not to levy the penalty under Section 76 of the Act having regard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
