9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as filed inadvertently in the office of the Deputy Commissioner-IV, which is situated in the same premises where the office of the Commissioner (Appeals) is located - appeal has been filed by the appellants within the time-limit prescribed though wrongly in another office - The Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the appeal as time-barred is set aside and the case is remanded back to him ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- imposed under Section 78 ibid. 2. I find that the applicants have already paid service tax of Rs.1,46,893/- along with the interest of Rs. 7,845/-. I consider it sufficient compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, I dispense with the pre-deposit of penalties imposed on the appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) is located. Due date for filing the appeal was the 29th December, 2006. However, the appeal was presented well before the said date i.e. on 27-11-2006, albeit wrongly in the office of the Deputy Commissioner. 6. In view of the above, I hold that the appeal has been filed by the appellants within the time-limit prescribed. The Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the appeal as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
