TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of electricity upto 21.06.2010 - In the case in hand, undisputedly, services rendered by appellant are to APTRANSCO. The entire tax liability which has been paid by them, if would have come in contest, the same would have been set aside due to retrospective notification issued by the Govt. of India - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - APPEAL No. ST/48/2011 - A/30256/2019 - Dated:- 8-2-2019 - Mr. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And Mr. P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Y. Siri Reddy, Advocate for the appellant Shri V.R. Pawan Kumar, Superintendent/AR for the Respondent. ORDER Per: Mr. M.V. Ravindran 1. This appeal is filed against Order-in-Revision No. 05/2010-ST, dated 28.09.2010. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dicating authority for non imposition of penalty under section 78 of the finance act to the equivalent amount of service tax liability confirmed. By the impugned order dated 28.09.2010, the Commissioner as a Revisionary authority, ordered the appellant to pay an additional amount of ₹ 1,15,933/- towards the penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Appellants are in appeal against such an order. 4. Ld. Counsel submits that the Order-in-Revision was passed after the Order-in-Appeal was pronounced on 31.07.2009 which in effect merged within the OIA, hence on the date of issuance of the impugned order, there was no O-I-A which needed revision. She submits that in an identical case, the Tribunal at Bangalore vide final order N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs: According to Notification No. 45/2010-ST, dt.20.07.2010, the tax on taxable services relating to transmission and distribution of electricity provided by the service provider to the service receiver which was not being levied shall not be required to be paid in respect of taxable services relating to transmission and distribution of electricity upto 21.06.2010. From the notification, it becomes quite clear that the service tax itself was not leviable if it was not levied during the relevant period. In this case, service tax has been levied and collected with interest and the question is only whether the appellant is required to pay revised penalty. Under the circumstances, I consider that in view of the Notification which exempts s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
