2006 (2) TMI 702

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt. Shri P.K. Katiyar, SDR, for the Respondent ORDER After hearing both sides & considering the submissions made in this application for waiver of pre-deposit requirement of the Service Tax penalty of ₹ 100 every day, arrived, by Commissioner in an order in review and thereafter limiting the penalty equivalent in amount payable of each of these cases cannot be upheld. The Commissioner is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion for imposition of lesser penalty. This stand of the State itself concedes that the assessing authorities are not bound to levy fixed penalty equal to ten times the amount of entry tax whenever the provisions of Section 7(5) are attracted. Depending upon the facts of each case the assessing authority has to decide as to what would be the reasonable amount of penalty to be imposed, the maximum b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e mandatory penalty of 100% prescribed yet same need not be upheld and there should be a finding by the assessing officer as to why the penalty levels have been kept at the mandatory levels. No reasons appear in the order & whatever reasons are arrived are at conflict with the order. Therefore the exercise of discretion in this view of the matter by the Commissioner cannot be upheld. These appeals .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X