2009 (6) TMI 78

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tax liability with interest and penalty of 25 per cent has been paid by the appellants. He has also observed that the nature of services rendered by the appellants is a category where customers seldom pay service tax. He has also taken note of the fact that appellants had not collected the service tax from their customers. He has also observed that the issue before him was only penalty under sect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... before Commissioner (Appeals) seeking relief of penalty under section 76 only. After due consideration Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the penalty and hence the appeal. 2. The learned DR, submits that having upheld the penalty under section 78 of Finance Act, 1994, it is quite apparent that Commissioner (Appeals) did not consider that appellants had reasonable cause for non-payment of service tax .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re of services rendered by the appellants is a category where customers seldom pay service tax. He has also taken note of the fact that appellants had not collected the service tax from their customers. He has also observed that the issue before him was only penalty under section 76 and other issues were not before him. I find that Commissioner (Appeals) has given valid reasons for his conclusion .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X