9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1463X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AR) ORDER Per: Raju The appellant, M/s Devike Construction & Developers Pvt. Ltd., filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. PUN-EXCUS-001-APP-0157-15-16 dated 3.12.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-I. 2. The brief facts of the case are that investigation revealed that the appellant are engaged in providing taxable service viz. Construction of Residential C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned AR relied on the impugned order. 5. I find that the Tribunal in the case of SP Associates (supra) has, in identical circumstances, observed as follows: - "5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. I find that the issue relates to the penalties imposed under Section 77 & 78 of the Finance Act due to non-payment of service tax in time on the services of construc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court wherein a stay was granted on 23.10.2010 and finally judgment was passed by the Hon'ble High Court in January 2012 only. Even the said judgment was challenged by Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry (supra) which is pending in the Hon'ble Supreme court. In view of this position, on the taxability of the services, the bona fide belief of the appellant in non payment of servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... identical except that a part of the duty amount of approximately Rs. 1 lakh was paid after the issue of show-cause notice in this case. That does not materially alter the facts. Relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of S.P. Associates (supra), the penalties imposed under Sections 77 & 78 are waived.
6. The appeal is partially allowed.
(Pronounced in Court on 02.09.2016) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
