9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tative Per : Mr. H.K. Thakur; This appeal has been filed by the appellant with respect to OIA No. OIA-AHM-SVTAX-000-APP-018-14-15 dated 22.04.2014 passed by passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Ahmedabad upholding OIO No. 41/STC-AHD /ADC (AS)/2012-13 dated 24.01.2013. 2. Shri S.J. Vyas, (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that his client was registered with the Service Tax autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntioned in Para 29 of the OIO dated 24.01.2013 that penalties of Rs. 1,93,555/- and Rs. 88,896/- pertain to the period prior to October 2006. Learned Advocate also made the Bench go through the chart made in the statements of fact, in appeal filed by the appellant to argue that no service tax or penalty was payable before October 2006. He also argued that Section 76 penalty is not imposable when S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Finance Act, 1994. It is observed from the order dated 22.4.2014 passed by the first Appellate authority that he has not deliberated on the issue of reconciliation of payment particulars and the amounts paid by the appellant. For the purpose of reconciliation of the payments made vis-`-vis duty liability of the appellant, the matter is required to be remanded back to the original adjudicating a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
