Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 795 - AT - Service TaxPenalty u/s 77 and 78 - Cable Operator Service - It emerged that the amounts declared in the ST-3 returns were much lower than that paid to the link operator and the subscription collected - Held that:- The appellants were brought into the service tax net by the Finance Act, 2002 w.e.f 16.08.2002 by the introduction of Section 65 (22) read with Section 65 (105)(zs) of the Finance Act, 1994 - In absence of any specific evidence for the department, collection amount as voluntarily disclosed by the appellant should have been accepted. There is no allegation of suppression in the SCN. Reliance placed in the case of Polimer Cable Network Vs. CCE, Salem [2018 (2) TMI 402 - CESTAT CHENNAI], where it was held that in respect of an assessee neither receiving television signals nor involved in distribution of such signals, but merely being an intermediary between MSO and franchisees (Local Cable Operator), and entertained bona fide belief of non-leviability of tax on them as Cable Operator, penalty not imposable under Sections 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994. The penalties imposed on the appellants under Section 76, 78 and 78 of the Finance Act, are set aside without disturbing the demand and interest - appeal allowed.
|