Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 1928 - CESTAT NEW DELHILevy of penalty u/s 78 of FA - case of appellant is that instead of adjusting the amount of tax paid earlier with the fresh calculation of tax which paid on fresh deposit they have mistakenly cross receipts with the earlier cross receipts resulting into some differential tax label due to changing of tax - no suppression of facts or evasion of tax - HELD THAT:- There is only venial breach of the provision of Rule 6 (3) of Service Tax Rules, and there is no mis-statement/suppression of facts on the part of the appellant. Further, it is found that they have deposited service tax regularly and filed returns in the ordinary course of business. The differential tax have arisen due to lack of understanding of the rules and law. The penalty under Section 78 of the Act is seta side - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|