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

CC, CE & ST-Hyderabad-IV Versus M/s Ruby Confectionary Pvt Ltd,

2016 (11) TMI 1219 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

Option to pay reduced penalty - job-worker to M/s. Parle Products Private Ltd. - assesee cannot be treated as own unit of M/s Parle Products Pvt. Ltd., for distribution of input service tax credits - period from 01.08.2005 to June, 2011 - time bar - whether the Commissioner (Appeals) has powers to give the benefit of 25% reduced penalty? - Held that: - the department has clarified that the benefit of reduced penalty would be available only at the stage of passing of the order by the Adjudicating .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

out giving an option to pay reduced penalty, the assessee was left with no choice but to challenge the penalty which he would otherwise have to pay, which is statutorily not actually leviable. Since statutory authorities have themselves acted illegally and contrary to first proviso to Section 11AC ibid, the assessee cannot be faulted for challenging the order. - Moreover in the present case, the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the demand which is hit by the limitation and has directed 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

ismissed - decided against Department. - Appeal No.E/327336/2013 - FINAL ORDER No.A/31016/2016 - Dated:- 25-10-2016 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S. Member(Judicial) Sh. P.S. Reddy Assistant Registrar (AR) for the Appellant. None for the Respondent. [Order per: Sulekha Beevi, C.S.] The above appeal is filed by department against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) who gave the respondent the option to pay reduced penalty. 2. The respondents are engaged in manufacture of confectionary and wer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

service tax credits. The Show Cause Notice was issued demanding wrongly availed credit on the period from 01.08.2005 to June, 2011, amounting to ₹ 14,49,469/along with interest and also proposing penalties. 3. After adjudication, the Original Authority confirmed the demand along with interest and imposed equal penalty. Being aggrieved the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) vide the order impugned herein held that the demand for the period be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rroneous. He relied upon the Circular No.898/18/2009-CX., dated 15.09.2009. He submitted that when the assessee files an appeal challenging the penalty imposed without availing option 25% reduced penalty prescribed by law, then the assessee would loose the option. That no further option can be given at appellant stage. 5. None appeared on behalf of the respondent. The matter was taken for disposal after hearing the department and by perusal of records. 6. The challenge in the appeal is confined .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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