9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant have not produced the reconciliation before the lower authority. Therefore, for deciding the quantum of penalty, first it is to be established the correct liability of Service Tax - the matter should go back to the original authority to ascertain the fact whether the Service Tax liability is 1,83,244 or the amount which confirmed the order in original and upheld in the order in appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of ₹ 21,23,463/- demand of service tax was raised which was confirmed by the original authority and penalty under section 77 & 78 also imposed. The appellant being aggrieved by the order-in-original, filed an appeal before the Commissioner (A) only seeking waiver of penalties. The appellant had paid the entire confirmed service tax along with interest before passing the order in original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that the reconciliation chart submitted by the appellant was not placed before the original authority as well as the Commissioner (A). He also submits that since the appellant have not contested the service tax liability. There is no question of considering the reconciliation. 4. I have carefully con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant have submitted the reconciliation before the Commissioner (A) but he has not considered the same. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the matter should go back to the original authority to ascertain the fact whether the Service Tax liability is ₹ 1,83,244 or the amount which confirmed the order in original and upheld in the order in appeals. The adjudicating authority sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
