ORDER : 1. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 31-5-2012 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short "Tribunal") [ 2013 (29) S.T.R. 177 (Tri. - Del.)] whereby the Tribunal upheld the confirmation of demand of service tax and cess along with interest on account of statutory levy and charges by the Commissioner and also upheld the confirmation of demand of service tax and cess along with interest by the Commissioner with regard to air ticket sold prior to 1-5-2006 and journey undertaken on 1-5-2006 or thereafter. Civil Appeal has been admitted by this Court on 21-9-2012. On that day, notice was issued in the application for stay. It is this application which has come up for consideration today. 2. We are informed that as per the impugned order, the appellant is required to pay about Rs. 13 Cr. towards service tax and Rs. 16.75 Cr. towards penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act 1994, as amended from time to time (for short "1994 Act"). 3. Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that out of Rs. 13 Cr. service tax liability, an amount of Rs. 6 Cr. has already been deposited. 4. On hearing Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, learned senior counsel for the revenue, we find no justification to stay the demand of service tax under the impugned order. Prayer for stay to that extent is rejected. 5. As regards penalty under Section 76 of 1994 Act, two aspects need to be noted, first, penalty has also been imposed on the appellant under Section 78 of the 1994 Act. That amount has already been paid by the appellant. By virtue of six proviso to Section 78, if the penalty is payable under Section 78, penalty cannot be imposed under Section 76. The position is admitted by the revenue in the affidavit filed by the concerned Commissioner. Secondly, in the order-in-original, a specific finding has been recorded that the appellant has not indulged in fraud, collusion or willful mis-statement nor has the appellant contravened the provisions with intent to evade payment of service tax. 6. Having regard to the above two aspects, we are satisfied that until final disposal of appeal, recovery of penalty amount amounting to Rs. 16.75 Cr. deserves to be stayed. We order accordingly. 7. 6. Having regard to the above two aspects, we are satisfied that until final disposal of appeal, recovery of penalty amount amounting to Rs. 16.75 Cr. deserves to be stayed. We order accordingly. 7. Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel for the appellant prays for four weeks' time to enable the appellant to deposit the remaining amount of Rs. 7 Cr. towards service tax. Time, as prayed for, is granted. 8. I.A. No. 1 of 2012 stands disposed of accordingly. Hearing of the appeal is expedited.