Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2013 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 71 - AT - Service TaxPenalty - ignorance of law - misguidance by the Consultant - Business Auxiliary Services - demand confirmed invoking the extended period of limitation - Held that:- On being asked about non filing of returns in his statement recorded under Section 14 it can be seen that he was misguided by the Consultant as to that the ICICI Bank is liable to pay the tax. After coming to know about the tax liability, he has paid the entire liability of service tax along with interest. This case is an appropriate case for condoning the lapse of not filing the return and not paying the service tax, but both the lower authorities have imposed penalties on the appellant for violation of rules. Lower authorities should have invoked the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 and should not have imposed any penalties on the appellant. as decided in Ram Travels [2012 (4) TMI 252 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] ignorance of law is enough to set-aside penalty under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. In favour of assessee.
|