Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2011 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (9) TMI 737 - AT - Service TaxDemand - Rent-a-Cab - Notification No. 9/2004-S.T., dated 9-7-2004 - In the matter of cum-duty benefit, the fact that the amount realized by the appellant is cum duty is not disputed by the Revenue - It appears likely that the supplementary bills may not have been paid by IFFCO and therefore, this fact has to be verified by the adjudicating authority and if the supplementary bills are not paid by M/s. IFFCO, the benefit of cum duty should be extended to the appellant Regarding penalty - Basically penalties under Sections 76 and 78 are for the same offence which principle has been recognized by amendment done w.e.f. 10-5-2008 by Finance Act, 2008 by adding a proviso under Section 78 - In this case the penalties imposed in the adjudication orders are based on quantum of duty worked out without following judicial principles and he could not have paid 25% of duty determined in the order-in-original - Appeal is allowed by way of remand
|