9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellant. Shri S.K. Bhaskar, SDR for the Respondent. [Order Per M. Veeraiyan]. - This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner No. ROM/65/CE/JAL/08 dated 30.9.08 which was passed in pursuance of remand order of the Tribunal No. 982/08-SM(BR) and S/382/08 dated 3.4.08. 2. There is a request for adjournment without giving any reason for seeking adjournment and the same is rejected. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Finance Act. The original authority after taking note of the fact that service tax along with interest has been paid on 6.11.03 after obtaining service tax registration on 5.11.03 and that Service Tax return have been filed on 11.12.03, dropped the proceedings for imposition of penalty vide his order dated 30.11.04. In the order of original authority while in one place it has been mentioned that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 is mentioned. The errors in the reply by the assessee got repeated in the order of the original authority and that of the Commissioner. Since in the reply received on 28.7.04, the date of payment is mentioned as 6.11.04 and 6.11.03, the former is clearly a clerical mistake. The delay involved is only 12 days and not one year plus 12 days. Accordingly, the penalty of Rs.37800/- imposed under Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
