9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the letter of the Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise informing them to pay the tax, the Appellants took one year for payment of tax - imposition of penalty is justified but penalty of equal amount of tax is not justified - Appellant deposited the tax with interest before issue of SCN and delay in payment was caused due to delay in payment of tax by the Police Authorities – therefore, penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant deposited the tax along with interest before issue of show cause notice. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of tax of Rs. 1,10,918/- and appropriated the said amount as deposited by the Appellants. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,10,910/- under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Adjudication Order. 2. Ld. Counsel on behalf of the Appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at payment of tax is not depending upon the release of funds by the Police Authorities. 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, I find that the Appellant in their Agreement with the Police Authorities mentioned that Service Tax is payable. Even that there was confusion on the payment of tax as revealed from the correspondence, which was settled by letter dated 5-4-2005 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or payment of tax. In view of that, I find that imposition of penalty is justified. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the imposition of penalty of equal amount of tax is not justified. The Tribunal in the case of J.K.D. Popat & Co. v. C.C.E., Nashik reported in 2008 (9) S.T.R. 541 (Tribunal) = 2008 (85) RLT 117 (CESTAT-MUM.) held that imposition of penalty under Section 76 is not mandato ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
