2009 (8) TMI 21

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nts. [Order Per S.S. Kang]. - Heard both sides. 2. The Appellant filed this Appeal against the impugned Order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby he held that there is no discretion with the authorities to impose lesser penalty than the confirmed demand. The Commissioner (Appeals) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharmendra Textiles Processors vs. UOI .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pression on their part to evade payment of service tax. 3. Contention of the Revenue is that the Appellant had not paid the service tax on due dates and subsequently, paid the service tax along with the interest. Hence, they are liable to penalty. 4. I find that in the impugned Order, the Commissioner (Appeals) after relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharmendra .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X