9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 147X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. ST/280/2008 Shri V. Poorna Chandra Rao, SDR for Appellant Shri R. Murlidhar, Adv. for Respondents Per T.K. Jayaraman: Revenue has filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 2/2008 (H-I) ST dated 26.3.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Customs Central Excise and Service Tax (Appeals-I & III), Hyderabad. 2. Shri V. Poorna Chandra Rao, learned SDR appeared for the revenue and Shri R. Murli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enied. The differential Service Tax was confirmed and penalties were also imposed under various sections of the Finance Act, 1994. Appellants approached the Commissioner (A). The Commissioner (A) after examining the various legal position and also taking into account the declarations submitted by the respondents before him dropped the proceedings and allowed the appeals of the respondents. 4. Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Tri.-Chennai) deals with similar situation. In the said case, the Tribunal held that the appellants would be entitled for abatement of 75%, as they had produced the certificate from the service provider. 5.2 As regards the lmposition of penalty, the learned advocate stated that there was no mala fide on the part of the respondent and imposition of penalties in the present case is not at all jus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... )
(ix) CCE, Delhi-III, Gurgaon Vs. Electrolux Kelvinator Ltd. - 2006 (206) ELT 1137 (P&H)
6. On a very careful consideration of the issue, it is seen that the Commissioner (A) has considered all the above decisions before dropping the proceedings, therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Revenue's appeal is rejected.
Pronounced and dictated in open Court. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
