2015 (4) TMI 823

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ri G R Singh, AR ORDER Per Ashok Jindal : The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order imposing penalties under section 70 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of excisable goods and they are availing goods transport agency services but they are not paying service tax on reverse charge mechanism. Later on, they took registr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ere under bonafide belief that as their total turn over is less than Rs. 10 lakhs for goods transport agency service, therefore they are not required for registration. In these facts and circumstances, they did not take registration in time and did not pay the service tax. When they released that they are required to pay service tax, immediately they took the registration and paid service tax with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... not exceed Rs. 10 lakhs. Therefore, I hold that the show cause notice was not required to be issued under section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. In these circumstances, penalties are not imposable on the appellant. Further, I find that appellant is not contesting the penalty imposed under section 78 of the Act. Therefore the benefit of this order will not be available for the penalty imposed und .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X