9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Cochin. 2.The appellant is the Managing Director of M/s. Force Seven Security & Investigation Pvt. Ltd., Trichur, which is engaged in the activity of Security Services. The above services come under the category of 'Security Agency' and taxable under Finance Act, 1994. It was revealed that the appellant failed to discharge the Service Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. After giving a personal hearing, the Assistant Commissioner enhanced the penalty amount equal to Rs. 93,695/- in his order dated 22-8-2005. The appellant filed an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal and upheld the order enhancing the penalty. Aggrieved over the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Finance Act could be exercised only to correct obvious and patent clerical mistakes and not to effect drastic changes in an already pronounced adjudication order. Moreover, in the present case, the appellant had paid the entire tax well before the issuance of the Show Cause Notice. The Assistant Commissioner had himself considered the gravity of the offence while imposing the penalty. A change ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot eligible for concession. This is very cruel. It is not that the appellant did not want to deposit the same but it was due to the non-availability of direction from the authorities. All the relevant documents were seized by the department and not returned till date. 5.The learned JDR reiterated the impugned order. 6.I have gone through the records of the case carefully. I agree with the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
