2022 (10) TMI 877

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Representative for the Respondent ORDER The appellant is in appeal assailing the order of the Ld. Commissioner of CGST & CX (appeal-I), Kolkata whereby he has allowed the appeal filed by the Department and imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- under section 77 and penalty of Rs.13,94,933/- under Section 78. 2. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 3. I observe that the appellant is dealing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cating Authority however refrained from imposing any penalty by applying Section 80 of Finance Act 1994. The Department was in appeal before the First Appellate Authority praying for imposition of penalties and the appeal of the Department was allowed and penalties were imposed. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The Ld. Advocate for the appellant submits 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

..... ervice Tax is leviable on the said component. I further note that it was held in the said case of CHARANJEET SINGH KHANUJA that the distributor is required to pay Service Tax on the Commission earned by it on the basis of volume of purchase of Amway products made by its sales group, that is, the group of Second level of Distributor appointed by Amway/Britt, who have been sponsored by the distribut .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X