Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Rohit Enterprises Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad

2015 (12) TMI 334 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Manpower Recruitment Agency service - penalty under Section 76, 77 and 78 - Benefit of Section 80 - Held that:- The service tax liability has not contested by the appellant as they have paid service tax alongwith interest before adjudication order ha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ble cause by which penalty can be waived invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. I therefore upheld the impugned order and dismissed the appeal. - Decided against assessee. - APPEAL NO.ST/86259/13 - Dated:- 17-6-2015 - Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ioner of Central Excise(Appeals), Mumbai-III, wherein Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the order-in-original dated 17/2/2012. 2. The fact of the case is that the appellant is engaged in providing services of Manpower Recruitment Agency to various cus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

se notice was issued proposing demand of service tax amounting to ₹ 2,19,174/- interest under Section 75 and penalty under Section 76,77 and 78. In the adjudication, the adjudicating authority has confirmed demand and imposed penalty of ₹ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and 78. The Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) rejected the appeal vide the impugned order therefore appellant is before me. 3. Shri. Bhushan Jain, Ld. C.A. appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant is small time service provider, illiterate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

authority may kingly be waived. 4. On the other hand, Shri. B. Kumar, Iyer, Ld. Superintendent (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. he submits that submission of the Ld. Counsel is not correct for t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version