Advanced Search Results

Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Lion Security Services

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service Tax

Acts : Central Excise Act - Sections 76 and 80

Reported in : 2008[9]STR529

law as formulated in Paragraph 4 of the Appeal memo.2. We find that considering Section 76 of the Central Excise Act read with Section 80, the authority has discretion to interfere with the penalty imposed. Once the discretion had … on the questions of law as formulated in Paragraph 4 of the Appeal memo.2. We find that considering Section 76 of the Central Excise Act read with Section 80, the authority has discretion to interfere with the

Commissioner of C. Ex. and Customs Vs. Mukul S. Patil

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service Tax

Acts : Central Excise Act - Sections 76 and 80

Reported in : 2008[10]STR115

ORDER1. The main contention as urged on behalf of the revenue is that considering Section 76 of the Central Excise Act the authorities had to impose the penalty as set out therein and there was no discretion to impose … ORDER1. The main contention as urged on behalf of the revenue is that considering Section 76 of the Central Excise Act the authorities had to impose the penalty as set out therein and … and there was no discretion to impose lesser penalty. After considering Section 80, we find that such a discretion is vested in the authority.In the

Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai Vs. M/S. Montage Securities Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Subject : Service Tax

Matched in: Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Commissioner of C. Ex. and Customs Vs. Vinay Bele and Associates

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service Tax

Acts : Central Excise Act - Sections 76 and 80; Finance Act, 1994

Reported in : 2008[9]STR350

ORDER1. The main contention as urged on behalf of the revenue is that considering Section 76 of the Central Excise Act (sic)(Finance Act, 1994), the authorities had to impose the penalty as set out therein and there was no … ORDER1. The main contention as urged on behalf of the revenue is that considering Section 76 of the Central Excise Act (sic)(Finance Act, 1994), the authorities had to impose the penalty as set … and there was no discretion to impose lesser penalty. After considering Section 80, we find that such a discretion is vested in the authority.2. In

Sre Venkateswara Hi-tech Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Subject : Service Tax

Reported in : (2007)6STR139

effect. Learned Consultant has relied on the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in ETA Engineering Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai 2006 (3) S.T.R. 429 (Tri.-LB), wherein the assessee, who had defaulted payment of Service Tax, was found … second on 31.07.2005. The department issued a show-cause notice on 18.01.2006 for imposing penalties on the party under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 for not having paid Service Tax in time and not having filed … records and submissions that the appellants are claiming the benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, which reads as under: Penalty not to

Ashwani and Associates Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Subject : Service Tax

Reported in : (2000)(118)ELT57TriDel

3-8-1998 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) vide which he confirmed the order-in-original of the Superintendent of Central Excise (Service Tax) imposing penalty of Rs. 14,969/- under Section 76 and Rs. 5,100/- under Section 77 of the … that he even issued any show cause notice to the appellants before imposing any penalty on them under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act. We find that no opportunity of hearing was also afforded to the appellants. … to prove that they had a sufficient cause in terms of Section 80 of the Finance Act for not filing the return and making the

Bellary Iron and Ores Pvt. Ltd., Mspl Ltd., Ramgad Minerals and Mining ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Subject : Service Tax

Acts : Finance Act 1994 - Sections 65, 65(23), 65(50), 65(105), 73(1), 76, 77, 78 and 80; Motor Vehicles Act - Section 2(24); Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Motor Vehicles Taxation Act; CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Rule 5

Reported in : [2010]21STJ214(CESTAT-Bangalore); 2010[18]S.T.R.406; [2010]24STT557; (2010)35VST107(CESTAT-Blore)

Matched in: Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Cce Vs. T. Stanes and Company Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Subject : Service Tax

Matched in: Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

P.B. Traders Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Subject : Excise

Reported in : (2000)(68)ECC429

the show cause notice dated 3-10-1994 demanding the above duty under the provisions of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 9(2) and or Rule 209 of the Central Excise Rules 1944, and also for … the Central Excise Rules, and failed to file classification list and price list for the goods manufactured under Section 173B and 173C of the said Rules, and failed to account in the statutory records under Rule 173G(1) … read with Rule 9(1) of the Central Excise Rules.2. Under Notification No. 76/86, dated 10-2-1986, (as amended) Handicrafts is exempt from the whole of the … sought for the waiver of the pre-deposit of duty amount of Rs. 80,22,475/-+ Rs. 12,03,372/- and the penalty of Rs. 92,25,846/- and for the stay

Vindhyachal Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Subject : Service Tax

Acts : Finance Act, 2005 - Sections 65(76), 68 and 69; Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 2; Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915; Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 65, 66 and 68(1); Madhya Prades General Sales Tax Act, 1958 - Sections 2; Madhya Pradesh Country Spirit Rules, 1995; Madhya Pradesh Country Spirit Rules, 1995 - Rules 2A and 3(3); Service Tax Rules, 1994 - Rules 4A, 4A(1) and 6; Service Tax (Amendemnt), Rules 1997 - Rule 2; Service Tax Rules, 1944

Reported in : (2007)7VST197(MP)

Matched in: Advocate Kunal Thakre and ;Akshat Sharma, Advs.;H.S. Shrivastava, Sr. Counsel, ;Girish Shrivastava and ;Vijay Raghav Singh, Advs. Dharmendra Sharma, Addl. Solicitor General and ;O.P. Namdeo, GA for UOI, Commissioner, Central Excise and ;Sanjay Yadav, Dy. AG