9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 5,204/- totaling to Rs. 2,65,429/- against the appellant for the period 10-9-2004 to 30-6-2006 under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 and had imposed penalties of Rs. 10,000/-, Rs. 1,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- on them under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Act respectively. The authority had also confirmed demand of interest on tax against the party under Section 75. The order of adjudication was accepted by the party. However, it was not accepted in full by the department. In exercise of his revisional jurisdiction under Section 84 of the Finance Act, the Commissioner took up the matter and imposed higher penalties on the party under Sections 76 & 78 of the Act. The operative part of the Commissioner's order reads as und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the party under the other provisions. However, it is submitted, the appellant accepted the decision of the original authority under the said provisions (Sections 76, 77 and 78). The learned consultant also relies on certain decisions of the Tribunal in support of some of the above submissions. I have heard the learned SDR also, who, apart from reiterating the findings of the Commissioner, points out that the finding of "wilful suppression and concealment of value of taxable service", recorded by the original authority was also accepted by the party and therefore they can hardly resist the mandatory penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Act. 4. After considering the submissions, I have to accept the plea made by the learned SDR in rela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shown for such non-payment of tax, for the benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act. The original authority imposed a penalty of Rs, 10,000/- on the assessee "in exercise of the powers under Section 80". Having found that no valid ground for the benefit of Section 80 was established by the assessee, I am unable to approve such exercise of power. The revisional authority has chosen to impose a penalty of Rs. 200/- per day from 10-9-2004 till the date of payment of service tax, not exceeding the actual amount of service tax. It appears that this penalty has been imposed without having regard to the fact that Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 was partly struck down by High Court. Unfortunately, neither side has cited the relevant judgment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
