TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 978X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er said Sections can be reduced to nil in case the duty /tax so demanded is paid even prior the issuance of the SCN. It stands reduced to 25% only in the case where the payment of the tax is made within 30 days of the issuance of the SCN. In the present case though the adjudicating authority failed to mention the entitlements of the assessee to the benefit of reduced penalty, but the fact remains is that when appellant herein is not entitled to the benefit of reduced penalty being not paid within 30 days of SCN, hence, no mention of this benefit in Order-in-Appeal is not relevant - penalty has already been reduced to 50% - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No. ST/51855/2018 [SM] - A/50026/2019-SM[BR] - D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5% of the recoverable service tax. The decision of Delhi High Court in the case KP Pouches Vs. Union on India 2008 (228) ELT 31 and the decision of High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner, CGST, Surat Vs. Metro Security Services 2017(7) GSTL 431 and a CBEC Circular dated 02.05.2008 is also impressed upon to substantiate the ground of Appeal. Penalty is accordingly prayed to be reduced. Order under challenge is accordingly prayed to be modified. 3. While rebutting these arguments, it is submitted by Ld. AR that the Order under challenge is a speaking Order. Due consideration to the ground of Appeal therein which is same for the present Appeal has been given in the said Order and accordingly the penalty has already been reduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (supra) as relied upon is opined not applicable to the present case. In the said case, it was held that where the assessee is entitled to benefit of reduced penalty and since the adjudicating order is silent about mentioning the same, the benefit to the assessee cannot be denied. In the present case though the adjudicating authority failed to mention the entitlements of the assessee to the benefit of reduced penalty, but the fact remains is that when appellant herein is not entitled to the benefit of reduced penalty being not paid within 30 days of SCN, hence, no mention of this benefit in Order-in-Appeal is not relevant. Therefore, I find no infirmity in the Order under challenge where the penalty has already been reduced to 50%. Order is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
