2018 (5) TMI 1216

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ellant Shri Mohammad Altaf, Assistant, Commissioner (AR), for Respondent Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar The present appeal is arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. NOI/SVTAX/000/APPL-I/131-A/14-15 dated 11/02/2015 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-I), Meerut. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants were receiving services of Bandwidth Charges and were required to pay se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issue was adjudicated through Order-in-Original dated 30.12.2013 wherein the demands were confirmed, proposed amounts were appropriated and equal amount of penalty under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994 was imposed. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The learned Commissioner (Appeals) decided the appeal through the impugned Order-in-Appeal dat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... st. Further, reverse charge service tax on Bandwidth Charges was also paid by them along with interest before issuance of show cause notice. Therefore, the issue of show cause notice was not authorized under the provisions of Sub-section (3) of Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, imposition of penalty is not sustainable. 4. Heard the learned A.R. for revenue, who has agreed that the said .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X