New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (1) TMI 480 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (1) TMI 480 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Levy of penalty - first appellate authority has reduced the penalty imposed under Section 78 to 25% of the tax liability and also set aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 for the period September 2007 to 9th May 2008 relying upon the provisions of Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - Held that:- it is settled that the judgement on a particular issue which passed by a Jurisdictional High Court, judicial discipline needs to be followed in preference .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ontrol for Cricket in India [2015 (1) TMI 856 - SUPREME COURT]. - Decided in favor of revenue. - Appeal No. ST/88092/13 - A/85093/16/SMB - Dated:- 22-12-2015 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) For the Petitioner : Shri A.B. Kulgod, Asst. Commr (AR) For the Respondent : Shri S.B. Awate, Consultant ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran This appeal filed by Revenue is against the order-in-appeal No. AV (134) 118/2013 dated 27.05.2013. 2. The issue involved in this case is that Revenue is aggrieved by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fit of payment of penalty of 25% of tax liability confirmed. He would submit that the respondent has not paid the amount of tax, interest and 25% of the penalty within 30 days from the receipt of the order-in-original. His submission is that the issue is now settled by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CCE India Raigad v. Castrol Ltd.- 2012 (286) ELT 194 (Bom.) and Sri Sai Enterprises v. CCE 2013 (288) ELT 40 (Del.). As regards the penalty under Section 76 for the period Septem .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ection 11AC should be mandatorily mentioned in the order-in-original itself by the adjudicating authority, and if not mentioned, the first appellate authority can extend the same, is his argument. To support his argument he relies upon the judgement in the case of CCE v. Sidhi Vinayak Dyg. & PTG. Mills - 2010 (261) ELT 663 which has been confirmed by the Honble High Court of Gujarat as reported at 2011 (265) ELT 869 (Guj). He would submit that the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the tax liability confirmed or otherwise, (2) whether simultaneous penalty can be imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 for the period September 2007 to 09 May 2008 or otherwise. 5.1 As regards the extending benefit of reduced penalty of 25% to the respondent by the first appellate authority, I find that the argument raised by the learned Consultant seems to be incorrect and does not carry their case any further, as the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Castrol Indi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

even the appellate authority can direct the assessee covered under Section 11AC to pay 25% of the penalty within thirty days from the date of communication of the order passed by the appellate authority is accepted, then it would defeat the very object with which the incentive under Section 11AC is allowed. The basic object of granting incentive under Section 11AC is to encourage payment of duty sought to be evaded with interest and penalty at 25% within the time stipulated therein. When the leg .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version