9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 676X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant was registered as Service Tax assessee from 2005 onwards. The new unit came into existence in 2008. In these circumstances, the provisions of Rule 4(3) will have no application as the said provisions apply only to units which were already availing the benefit of common registration prior to 2.11.2006 - quantum of penalty reduced. Appeal allowed in part. - Appeal No. ST/90039/14 - A/87754/2018 - Dated:- 12-10-2018 - SHRI RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Dayananda K, C.A. for Appellant Shri Dilip Shinde, AC (AR) for Respondent ORDER Per: Raju This appeal has been filed by M/s Genom Biotech Pvt. Ltd. against imposition of penalty. 2. Learned C.A. for the appellant argued that they are an EOU. In 2008, an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of activities, no taxable or exemption from Service Tax, the liability of ₹ 88,084/- (FY 2006-07), ₹ 41,553/- (FY 2007-08) and ₹ 14,812 (FY 2008-09) was crystalized against them in para 4.7 of the order. However, para 4.8 of the order which consolidates to total demand for the entire period, total liability has been worked out as ₹ 2,74,302/-. Learned C.A. argued that they had paid ₹ 1.29 lakhs while filing the ST-3 returns from time to time and therefore, the said amount should have been confirmed again. He argued that penalty under Section 78 has been imposed on the ground that the appellant have suppressed the value of clearance. He denied that they have mis-declared the value of clearance. He argued that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty already paid at the time of filing the returns. For this calculation, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority. 4.1 In so far as penalty under Section 77(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 is concerned, it is seen that the appellant was registered as Service Tax assessee from 2005 onwards. The new unit came into existence in 2008. In these circumstances, the provisions of Rule 4(3) will have no application as the said provisions apply only to units which were already availing the benefit of common registration prior to 2.11.2006. However, considering the nature of offences, the penalty under Section 77(1) is reduced to ₹ 10,000/- only. Penalty under Section 77(2) is upheld. Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
