9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 761X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er (AR), for respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra This is an appeal filed against order-in-original No. 18/ST/2013/C dated 22.8.2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in providing various taxable services under the category of (i) construction service in respect of commercial and industrial construct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Finance Act, 1994. Hence the present appeal. 3. At the outset, learned Advocate, Shri P.V. Sadavarte for the appellant, submits that the appellant does not dispute the liability of service tax since it was short paid during the relevant period. However, the reason for such short payment is attributable for non-payment of their dues by M/s. National Highway Authority of India, in time. He h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice tax. It is his contention that the appellant has received the full amount of service tax from the service recipient. Therefore, failure to discharge the said amount would invite penalty and rightly imposed by the adjudicating authority. 5. We have carefully gone through the records and submissions advanced by both sides. 6. The short issue involved in the present appeal is whether penalties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d circumstances of the case, considering the entire amount of service tax with interest has been paid, therefore the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 is upheld and penalty imposed under Section 76 is set aside. Appeal is partly allowed to the extent of setting aside imposition of penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. 7. The impugned order is modified to the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
