9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra, Advocate ORDER By this appeal, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, challenges the order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal, Bench at Mumbai dated 4.4.2014, partly allowing an appeal filed by the respondent and setting aside the demand for service tax, except the period from 1.4.2005 to 31.3.2006. It is submitted on behalf of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made on behalf of the appellant. The Tribunal had, on an appreciation of the material on record found that there was a definite confusion in the minds of even the Departmental Officers including the Commissioner of Service Tax, Ahmadabad whether service tax was leviable on the services provided by the respondent, who was performing statutory functions. The Tribunal found that none of the ingredie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal rightly held that the appellant Department was not liable to levy the service tax for a period extending one year. Since none of the ingredients mentioned in the proviso to Section 73 of the Act applied to the facts of the case, the Tribunal rightly found that the imposition of penalty on the respondent was not justified as penalty could be levied under Section 78 of the Act, only if either ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
