9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mar Kathuria,Advocate PER: S.K. MOHANTY Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order dated 26.05.2011 passed by the Commissioner, Service Tax, New Delhi. Impugned order has been assailed on the ground that dropping of proposal for imposition of penalty under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 therein is not proper and justified inasmuch as, the show cause notice has alleged suppr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x or non-compliance of legal requirement deliberately. It is viewed that being a government undertaking, there is absence of personal gain for an individual and it cannot be held that there was a suppression or willful misstatement or contravention of the provisions of law with the guilty intentions. 18.4 Since M/s.AAI have discharged their liability of the service tax alongwith the interest be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant with interest. Thus, in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 73 ibid, there was no necessity for issuance of show cause notice, only for imposition of penalty. 5. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order so far as dropping the liability for imposition of penalty on the respondent is concerned. As such, we dismiss the appeal filed by Revenue. [Dictated and prono ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
