Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Lark Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.

1. this is an appeal filed by the revenue against the reduction of penalty imposed on the respondents. shri m.k. srivastava, ld. sdr appearing for the revenue submits that as per the section 76 of the service tax act, the minimum penalty prescribed is rs. 100/- per day which is the mandatory penalty. while reducing the penalty to rs. 200/- per week, the commissioner (appeals) has gone beyond the scope of the said section 76. he further submits that the commissioner (appeals) has no power to condone the period of delay in the matter.2. the ld. advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that in para 4 of the impugned order the commissioner (appeals) has recorded sufficient reasons for reducing the penalty amount. besides, section 80 of the service tax act gives discretionary power to the commissioner (appeals) not to impose or to reduce the penalty. he submits that the commissioner (appeals) has given sufficient reasons for reducing the penalty as such, there is no need to interference in the order of the commissioner (appeals).3. after hearing both sides, perusal of the records and the provisions as contained in service tax act, i find that section 80 has over riding effect on sections 76, 77, 78 and 79 of the service tax act. therefore, when the commissioner (appeals) has reduced the penalty in exercise of the power as conferred in section 80 and has given reasons therefor, i do not find any legal infirmity in the order of the commissioner (appeals). therefore, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.