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

2017 (4) TMI 858 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

2017 (4) TMI 858 - CESTAT HYDERABAD - TMI - Imposition of penalty u/s 78 of FA, 1994 - It was noticed by the department that appellants did not file ST-3 returns and did not discharge their service tax liability for the period from April 2010 to March 2011 - case of appellant is that they had provided the services to Government Departments and they did not receive the service tax component. They could not discharge their tax liability only because of financial hardships - Held that: - total dema .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f demand, interest thereon or the late fee imposed u/s 77 of FA, 1994 - appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of assessee. - ST/27327/2013 - A/30354/2017 - Dated:- 9-2-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial) Sh. V.S. Sudhir, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Sh. M. Chandra Bose, Joint Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent ORDER [Order Per Sulekha Beevi, C. S.] 1. The above appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

have not paid service tax to the tune of ₹ 41,14,067/- for the said period. During the investigation, the appellants paid an amount of ₹ 27,78,816/- along with interest of ₹ 2,70,140/- and intimated the same to the department vide letter dated 12.03.2012. A show cause notice was issued dated 09.04.2012 raising demand of ₹ 41,14,067/- for the period April 2010 to March 2011. After due process of Law, the original authority confirmed the demand appropriated the amount alre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ellant is contesting only the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. That the appellant had provided the services to Government Departments and they did not receive the service tax component. They could not discharge their tax liability only because of financial hardships. It is submitted by him that the appellant is not guilty of any suppression of facts for the reason that the amount of service tax demanded has been arrived on the basis of the turnover reflected in the fina .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

se of Ramanasekar Steels Ltd., Vs CCE, Chennai [2008 (9) STR 132 (Tri-Chennai)] to absolve the assessee from penalty imposed under Section 78. 4. Against this, the Ld. AR Sh. Chandra Bose reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that in para 11 of the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) has discussed in detail that the appellants have not put forward reasonable cause to invoke Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 in order to give the benefit of penalty imposed under Secti .....

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