TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is fully justified. Since it is a case of willful evasion of service tax and not depositing the amount collected as service tax, the penalty under Section 78 is also warranted. Inasmuch as a penalty under Section 78 is being sustained, there is no justification for restoring the penalty under Section 76 as sought for by the department. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) has clearly erred in reducing the penalty imposed by the original authority under Section 78 without any valid reasons. Therefore, such order is set aside and order of the original authority in this regard is restored. Decided partly in favor of Revenue. - ST/156/2010 & ST/1014/2009 - - - Dated:- 25-11-2011 - Mr. M. Veeraiyan, J. Appearance None for the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce of the Tribunal's remand order, the original authority vide order dated 03.02.2009 confirmed the demand of Rs. 3,79,607/- along with interest and imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,79,607/- under Section 76 and an amount of Rs. 3,79,607/- under Section 78 and a penalty of Rs. 6,000/- under Section 77. On appeal by the party against the said order, Commissioner (Appeals) modified the order of the original authority by setting aside the penalty under Section 76 and reducing the penalty imposed under Section 78 from Rs. 3,79,607/- to Rs. 1,00,000/- only. 3.3. The assessee is challenging the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) insofar as the same is against them and the department is in appeal against setting aside the penalty under Section 76 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, has no merits. The fact that they have received money through cheques from the service recipients and that they reflected the transactions in their IT returns are not grounds justifying non-compliance of provisions under the service tax law relating to taking registration, filing of returns and depositing the money collected as service tax. Since it is a case of willful evasion of service tax and not depositing the amount collected as service tax, the penalty under Section 78 is also warranted. 6.2. The department is aggrieved on two grounds. It is submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) should have sustained a penalty under Section 76 also. Inasmuch as a penalty under Section 78 is being sustained, there is no justification for res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
