TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ying on decision of M/s. Madhav Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, [2012 (3) TMI 283 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] - demands accordingly confirmed. Simultaneous penalty u/s 76 & 78 - Held that:- As decided in CCE versus First Flight Courier Ltd. [2011 (1) TMI 52 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA] that simultaneous penalties under section 76 and 78 are not warranted - while uph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re dismissed for non-compliance vide Final Order No. Service Tax/629-631/11 dated 5.12.11. 3. The present ROA application stand filed by the applicant along with COD application for condoning the delay in filing the restoration of appeal application on the ground that the amounts were deposited by the applicant on 4.11.2010 i.e. the entire amount of Service Tax was deposited even before passing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise, Indore holding against the appellant. It stands held by the Tribunal that a bank run by co-operative society is also liable to pay Service Tax under the category of Banking and other Financial services. However, while dealing with the imposition of penalties, the Tribunal has observed that penalties under section 76 and section 78 of the Finance Act cannot be imposed together. By observing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfirmed. 8. As regards penalties, we find that the lower authorities have imposed the same under section 76 as also under Section 78 of the Finance Act. The Tribunal in the earlier matter, by taking note of decision of Hon ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of First Flight Couriers Ltd. [2011 (22) STR 622 (P H)] has observed that simultaneous penalties under section 76 and 78 are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
