9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri. V Sridharan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Somesh Jain, CA &Shri Jay Chheda, CA, for Appellants Shri. Roopam Kapoor, Comm. (A.R) for respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra 1. These two appeals are filed one by the Revenue and the second one by the assessee against the same order-in-original No.34/ST-II/RS/2012 dated 30/10/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-II. The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erest and penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal. 3. Revenue has filed the appeal on the ground that the learned Commissioner has wrongly extended the benefit of discharging 25% of the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 4. At the outset, the learned Advocate Shri V Sridharan, for the appellant submits that during the relevant period the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... However, the proceedings before the learned Commissioner be confined to the issues raised before him earlier and not the grounds now taken in the miscellaneous application. 6. In his rejoinder, the learned Advocate Shri V Sridharan for the appellant submits that once the order is passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice, the same becomes non-est in eyes of law and therefore, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to the issues raised earlier in their defense. Since we remand the matter to the adjudicating authority, in our opinion all issues should be examined afresh, taking into consideration the submissions on record and the plea that would be advanced in the denovo proceedings. In other words, all issues are kept open. Needless to mention, a reasonable opportunity of hearing be allowed to the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
