Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2016 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 1279 - DELHI HIGH COURTSuppression of facts - Penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - failure to discharge liability of tax - intention to evade duty present or not - extended period of limitation - Held that: - in any event there is no material pointing to deliberate inaction - where the appellant claims not to have been aware of its liability before its registration, in 2009. However, at the same time, having regard to the phraseology of Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, this court is unable to disturb the findings of the authorities below on this aspect. Although the non compliance with Section 78 of the Act does not per se invalidate the penalty, at the same time, given that the option was not granted, and also that the appellant had deposited a substantial amount at the stage of adjudication and did not contend that it was not liable, we are of the opinion that limited relief in terms of that provision is justified in the peculiar circumstances of the case - The assessee/appellant has the option to deposit the balance service tax together with accumulated interest and penalty of 25% of the entire tax due, within the period indicated in the third proviso to Section 78(1). Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant-assessee.
|