2010 (10) TMI 414

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r the Respondent. [Order] . - The dispute arose when the appellants sought registration belatedly to discharge its obligation under Finance Act, 1994. There was an allegation that the appellant collected a sum of Rs. 89,15,270/- towards output services rendered by them which included service tax of Rs. 9,52,147/- for the months of April, 2008 to June, 2008. A show cause notice dated 26-9-2008 wa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eing a newcomer of business, there was a delay in depositing the tax as well as seeking registration. Therefore, levy of penalty under both the sections shall be harsh, when the  appellant came forward to deposit the Service Tax. 3. Ld. DR on the other hand, supports the order of the authority below. 4. It is surprising to note from the orders of the authority below that they did not e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nts of Section 78 exist to impose penalty. Granting fair opportunity of hearing to the appellant the authority shall examine entire allegation in the show cause notice and pass a reasoned and speaking order. Thus, setting aside orders of both authorities below, the matter is remanded to the ld. Adjudicating Authority to pass a reasoned and speaking order. (Dictated & pronounced in the open Court) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X