TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TB - Dated:- 27-9-2017 - Mr Ramesh Nair, Member(Judicial) And Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri. B. Kumar Iyer, Superintendent(A.R.) for the Appellants Shri. L. Badrinarayan, Advocate with Shri. Vinay Jain, C. A. for the Respondent ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair The Revenue filed this appeal against Orders-in-Original No.31 to 34/ST/SB/2012-13 dated 30-10-2012 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax: I, Mumbai. Being aggrieved by the said order inasmuch as Ld. Commissioner did not impose penalty under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 the present appeal. 2. Shri. B. Kumar Iyer, Ld. Superintendent(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterating the ground of appeal submits that the penalty was proposed un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In respect of the first Showtause Notice dated 31/03/2009: (i) I confirm demand of ₹ 45,05,15,200/- (Rupees Forty Five Crore Five Lakhs Fifteen Thousand Two Hundred Only) against M/s. Vodfone Essar Ltd. (ii) I order payment of interest at the appropriate rate applicable during the relevant period, on the amount confirmed at para (i) above, from the date it became due till the date of payment, under Section 75 ibid. (iii) I impose penalty of ₹ 200/- per day or @ 2% of service tax payable, per month whichever is higher, starting with the first day after the due date till the date of actual payment of the outstanding amount of service tax, under Section 76 ibid upto the period 09/05/2008. No penalty under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 47,30,512/-(Rupees Nineteen Crores Forty Seven Lakhs Thirty Thousand Five Hundred Twelve only). (ii) Payment of interest at the appropriate rate applicable during the 'relevant period', on the amount confirmed at part (i) above, from the date it became due till the date of payment, is hereby ordered under Section 75 ibid. (iii) I impose penalty of ₹ 200/- per day or @2% of tax payable, per month whichever is higher, starting with the first day after the due date till the date of actual payment of the outstanding amount of service tax, under Section 76 ibid. (iv) For failure to file correct ST-3 Returns as required under Section 70 of the said Act., and failure to file list of records maintained, read with Rul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amount confirmed at para (i) above, from the date it became due till the date of payment, is hereby ordered under Section 75 ibid. (iii) I impose penalty of ₹ 200/- per day or @ 2% of tax payable, per month whichever is higher, starting with the first day after the due date till the date of actual payment of the outstanding amount of service tax, under Section 76 ibid. (iv) For failure to tile correct ST-3 Returns as required under Section 70 of the Act; and failure to file list of records maintained, read with Rule 5 and Rule 7 of Service Tax Rules,1994I, a penalty of ₹ 5,000/- is imposed under the provisions of Section 77 ibid. I am, inclined to reduce the aforesaid amount, under a reasonable belief, on the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng telephone service. The assessee claimed that when the Departmental officer has taken a view similar to that taken by the noticees, it is clear that the issue involves a question of interpretation of law and the view taken by the noticees is also a possible view and therefore, penalty cannot be imposed. From the above paragraph, it is clear that the Adjudicating authority has though recorded submission but not given findings. It also appears that there is error appearing in the order that no order was passed in the operating portion of the order relating to the above findings. We therefore remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for passing order on the penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Appeal is disposed of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
