TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... – held that activities of arranging sale thereof would cover the definition of “Real Estate Agent” - So, demand of tax and interest are justified - submission of the appellant that the amount of penalty is excessive, is accepted – so penalty is reduced - 457 of 2006 - 114/2009-ST - Dated:- 4-3-2009 - Mr. M. Veeraiyan, Member (Technical) and Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial) Shri Alok Arora, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring investigation the appellant by its letter dated 18.12.2002, informed the Central Excise authorities that payment was made for introducing the prospective buyer of plot and arranging the sale thereof. Show cause notice dated 9.3.2004 was issued proposing demand of tax of Rs. 1,54,118-00 under the category of "Real Estate Agent". The Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise dropped the proceedings. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner. He submits that the appellant in their letter dated 18.12.2002 clarified that the payments were made for arrangement of sale. He also submits that the appellant was engaged in rendering the service in relation to the sale of property and, therefore they are "Real Estate Agent". 5. After hearing both the sides, we find that by letter dated 18.12.2002 the appellant clarified that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that the amount of penalty is excessive. We have also noticed that the original authority dropped the proceedings. In view of that imposition of penalty of Rs. 500/- under Section 75A, Rs. 1000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 is upheld. Penalty under Section 76 of the Act is reduced to Rs. 20,000/-. 7. Appeal is disposed of in above terms. (Dictated pronounced in the Open Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
