2018 (3) TMI 1628

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... see-Appellant/Respondent has accepted that he was liable to pay the Service Tax which was not paid during the period under consideration - demand upheld. Penalty u/s 76 - Held that:- The assessee-Appellant/Respondent has himself paid the major part of the Service Tax demand. In these circumstances, the appellate authority has dropped the penalty under Section 76 which appears reasonable in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ruitment or Supply Agency Service , but had evaded the Service Tax during the period 16.06.2005 to 31.12.2007. Both the lower authorities have levied the Service Tax of ₹ 8,65,658/- including cess. The assessee-Appellant/Respondent has already deposited the major part of the demand. Even then, they have filed the present appeal. The Department has also filed the appeal on the ground that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llate authority has already upheld the penalty under Section 78, but dropped the penalty under Section 76 for the reasons mentioned in the impugned order. In the instant case, the assessee-Appellant/Respondent has himself paid the major part of the Service Tax demand. In these circumstances, the appellate authority has dropped the penalty under Section 76 which appears reasonable in the peculiar f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X