Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Jeevan Diesels & Electricals Ltd., Unit II Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Puducherry

2016 (9) TMI 81 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Waiver of penalty - imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - invokation of extended period of limitation - service tax payment for the month of February 2007 was paid in the year 2011 - Held that:- it is found that appellant duly discharge .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erits consideration when the entire tax liability along with interest stands discharged. Therefore, the quantum of penalty imposed under Section 78 is reduced to 25% - Decided partly in favour of appellant - E/40320/2015 - FINAL ORDER No.41071/2016 - .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The tax liability with interest stands discharged by the appellant as confirmed in the impugned order at para-5. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the penalty under Section 77 imposed by the adjudicating .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

000/- under Section 77, but has upheld the imposition of penalty under Section 78 invoking longer period, on the ground that service tax payment for the month of February 2007 was paid only in the year 2011 and held that element of suppression cannot .....

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 interest. In fact, there is a finding by the adjudicating authority that though appellants were eligible for abatement of 75% on the gross receipt, the department miscalculated the tax liability for the month of February 2007. Therefore, there is n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and May 2008 and it is barred by limitation. He submits that appellate authority's finding that the imposition of penalty of ₹ 10,080/- against the total tax demand of ₹ 34,685/-is already reduced one is not correct as there was no di .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version