9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to pay the differential tax had occurred due to the ignorance - the appellants have made a strong prima facie case against the imposition of penalty under Section 76 of the Act in the revisional order on the strength of case law – stay granted - S/126/2008 - 802/2008 - Dated:- 6-9-2008 - Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) Shri P. Sivaraman, CA, for the Appellant. Shri M.K.A.K. Mohiddin, JD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 (the Act). 2. Moving the application for waiver and stay, the ld. Consultant for the appellants submits that failure to pay the differential tax had occurred due to the ignorance of the appellants. He reiterates the grounds taken in the appeal and submits that, as held by the Hon'ble High Curt of Bombay in CCE CUS, Daman v. Lion Security Services - 2008 (9) S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court had vacated a decision of the Tribunal, which had reduced the penalty imposed by the fact finding authority under Section 76 of the Act simply placing reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court and the decision of the Delhi Bench without assigning any reasons. The Hon'ble High Court also observed that the judgment of the Apex Court and Delhi Bench had no application to the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
