Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (1) TMI 158 - CESTAT BANGALORE

2016 (1) TMI 158 - CESTAT BANGALORE - TMI - Levy of penalty - waiver u/s 80 - Job Work - process of anodizing the aluminium frames sent to them by solar water heater manufacturers - appellant admitted that they were liable to service tax and interest thereon and the service tax with interest was paid during the months of June 2007 to March 2008 - Held that:- appellant really did not know about the law and they had not even collected the tax and even then they discharged the liability with any qu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

I consider this is a fit case for waiver of penalty - Penalty waived - Decided in favor of assessee. - ST/2095/2011-SM - Dated:- 12-6-2015 - B S V Murthy, Member (T) For the Appellant : Mrs Vijaya Prakash, Adv For the Respondent : Mr Pakshi Rajan, Asst Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per B S V Murthy The appellant is engaged in the process of anodizing the aluminium frames sent to them by solar water heater manufacturers and other manufacturers. In respect of the job work undertaken for solar water hea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o appropriate the amounts paid and imposing penalty. The original adjudicating authority invoked provisions of Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994 waived the penalty on the ground that the appellants appeared to have been confused about their liability. On an appeal filed by the Revenue, the Commissioner(Appeals) held that appellants were liable to penalty and accordingly imposed penalties under Sections 76, 77 & 78 of Finance Act, 1994. Hence the appeal. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. The learned .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e submits that the moment the appellant came to now that the work undertaken by them is liable to service tax and there was no exemption in spite of the fact that the anodizing work was done for the manufacturers for the purpose of solar water heater, they discharged the liability. She submits that the decision of the original authority was proper and in order and no need to be interfered with. The learned AR would rely upon several decisions to submit that ignorance of law is not an excuse and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version