9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all stand withdrawn once the arrears of service tax, penalty, interest etc are paid in terms of the scheme and a certificate issued by the designated authority in terms of S. 96(2) of the Finance Act, 2008 – therefore, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn - S/2/2006 - 144 of 2009 - Dated:- 5-2-2009 - Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical) Shri M.K.A.K. Mohiddin, JDR for the Appellant. None ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. In the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) modified the penalty imposed u/s 76 of the Act to Rs.2,000/-. In so reducing the penalty imposed by the original authority the first appellate authority had taken into account a confusion that existed during the material period, the part payment of the dues made by the respondents before issue of the show-cause notice and also the ratio of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed within those limits, but then that does not mean, that the authorities have any power to impose penalty less than the minimum prescribed by the section." 2. On 27.1.1999 the impugned order was upheld and the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. However, it appeared that in terms of the judgment of the High Court of Rajasthan the Commissioner (Appeals) had reduced the penalty contrary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cheme, 2008. As per the certificate the respondents paid an amount of Rs. 2,531/- complying with the order dated 29.9.2008 issued by the designated authority and the payment was towards full and final settlement of tax arrears determined in the said order. As per the certificate the respondents were granted immunity from institution of any proceeding for imposition of penalty under the Act in resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
