TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1447X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lty set aside - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - ST/3533/2012-SM - 22455/2017 - Dated:- 16-10-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member Shri Naveen Kumar - For the Appellant None - For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S. GARG The present appeal has been filed by the revenue against the impugned order dated 04.09.2012 passed by the Commissioner (Appeal) whereby th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmed the demand of ₹ 20,97,558/- alongwith interest and imposed penalty of equal amount under section 78 in addition to penalty under section 76 and 77 of Finance Act, 1994. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeal) and the Commissioner (Appeal) vide the impugned order observed that the original authority denied the benefit of abatement s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erial and therefore be provided on uniform basis vide notification No.15/2004 service tax dated 10.09.2004 allows the abatement of 67% thereon which the appellant is entitled to. Aggrieved by the said order, the revenue has filed the present appeal. 5. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, I proceed to decide the appeal of the revenue on the basis of available record and the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and perusal of the impugned order, I find that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. Further, I find that the department has not produced any evidence which shows that there is suppression of material fact by the assessee with intent to evade payment of service tax. It is necessary to reproduce the relevant para 10, 11 and 12 of the impugned order which is reproduced herein below: 10. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld have to be reduced by the cost of such materials. For ease of calculation and to provide a uniform basis, Notification No.15/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004 allows and abatement of 67% thereon which the appellant is entitled to. 12. The appellant has claimed to have discharged tax liability upto 17.04.2006 which the balance remitted on 23.04.1007. Due credit should have been given for this if the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
