9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent. Per Rakesh Kumar In this case, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of V.P.Sugar and Molasses and were liable to pay service tax on the same, for which they had Service Tax Registration. The allegation against the appellant is that they delayed payment of service tax in respect of the GTA Service during the period of May, 2007 to June, 2007. For this failure to pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... li Mohan Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax reported in 2011 (21) STR 512. He, therefore, pleaded that the impugned order upholding the penalty on the appellant under Section 76 is not correct. 4. Shri R.K. Gupta, ld. SDR defending the impugned order pleaded that it is not disputed that there was delay in payment of service tax during the months of April to June, 2007, that Section 76 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 76 has been imposed. The only proviso under which the penalty can be waived is Section 80 for which the appellant have to give reasons as to why they could not discharge the duty liability by the due date. Except financial problems, no other reasons has been given by them. This is not a valid reason for wavier from penalty. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this appeal and there is no infirmit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
