Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce & St, Raipur vs M/S. Hira Cement on 21 January, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
COURT NO. III
Service Tax Appeal No. 60554/2013-ST[SM]
Service Tax COD Application No. 61682/2013
[Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No.112(ST)/RPR-l/2013 dated 11.06.2013 passed by CCE, Ludhiana]
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member
1
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3
Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
Seen
4
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes
CCE & ST, Raipur Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Hira Cement Respondents
Appearance:
Shri R.K. Mishra, AR for the Appellant Shri Rupinder Singh, Advocate for the Respondent Coram: Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member Date of Hearing: 21.01.2014 FINAL ORDER NO._50771 /2014_ Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa:
The delay in filing the present appeal by the revenue is condoned.
2. Revenue is an appeal against that part of the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he had held that simultaneous penalties under Section 76 and 78 cannot be imposed is the said section are mutually exclusive. For the above proposition he has relied upon the Honble Punjab & Haryana High Court decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. First Flight Courier Ltd. 2011 (22) STR 622 (P & H).
3. Revenue in their memo of appeal have again reiterated the grounds on merits and has nowhere contested the applicability of the said decision of the Honble Punjab & Haryana High Court. Inasmuch as the issue stands decided, I find no reasons to interfare in the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals). Revenues appeal is accordingly rejected.
(Pronounce in the open Court) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) Jyoti*