TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest has also been given utmost importance following ration of the Apex Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise vs, Dunlop India Ltd.[1984 (11) TMI 63 - SUPREME Court] and in the case of Benara Valves Ltd.vs.CCE [2006 (11) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - Both sides agree that reconciliation is pending. But to protect interest of Revenue, as an interim measure, the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pretext or other, submission of the materials called for scrutiny was delayed by appellant preventing Revenue to cause examination thereof. Such act of the appellant appears to be abuse of process of law so as to delay in discharging adjudicated demand on the plea of pendency of its stay application. 4. Record reveals that stay application came up to record on 24.08.2012 as against first appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . But the appellant without supplying documents to the Revenue inspite of specific order on 03.12.2012 and 13.12.2012 followed dilatory tactics. This has caused prejudiced to the interest of Revenue when there was service tax demand of Rs.24,56,897/- and equal amount of penalty under section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. So also Penalties of Rs.5,000/- under section 77 and also penalty under section 76 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
