GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (6) TMI 409 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

2016 (6) TMI 409 - CESTAT HYDERABAD - TMI - Imposition of penalty - Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 - default in payment of service tax - paid afterwards with interest - manpower recruitment or supply agency service - no suppression or intention to evade tax - tax collected had not been paid - Held that:- the appellant has produced documents showing that his mother was hospitalized for serious ailment and that he was going through utter financial crisis. In the judgments relied by the appell .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

RT], I hold that the penalty imposed under Section 76 is liable to be set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant - Appeal No. ST/657/2012 - Dated:- 20-1-2016 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member(Judicial) Shri V. Govindaraju, CA for the appellant. Shri TJS. Prabhakaran, Authorised representative for the respondent. ORDER [Order per: Sulekha Beevi, C.S.] 1. The appellants are aggrieved by the penalty imposed for delay in payment of service tax. 1.1. The appellant is a propreitory concern engaged in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ards the balance. The appellant thus discharged services tax liability with interest thereon. However, a show-cause notice dt. 18/08/2010 was served on the appellant on 23/08/2010 proposing penalty under Section 76, 77 and 78. After adjudication, the original authority confirmed the demand of ₹ 12,39,521/- and interest of ₹ 2,36,674/- and ordered appropriation of the amount of ₹ 15,95,310/- already paid by the appellant. In the said order, the adjudicating authority also impose .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ction 76. The appellant has already paid penalty imposed under Section 77 for delay in filing return. He submitted that there was no suppression or intention to evade tax. The appellant defaulted only because his mother was sick and he was in much financial stringency. That after verification, no discrepancy was noted in the accounts which would establish that there was no suppression. The only allegation is that appellant failed to pay the tax in due time. That immediately on being pointed out .....

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