TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 705X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usion as to whether the service recipient who is bound to pay the service tax is liable to pay service tax on the TDS portion - Further, since the appellants have discharged the service tax, the penalties imposed are unwarranted. In the case of C. Ramachandran Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai [2016 (7) TMI 1036 - CESTAT CHENNAI] the Tribunal has held that in such situation penalties oug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... engineers provided by M/s. Lenjtes GMBH, Germany, for which the appellants have discharged service tax as a service recipient under section 68(2) of Finance Act read with Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of Service Tax Rules, 1994. As per the contract, the consideration was payable in four equal instalments. On this amount, the appellant is liable to deduct the Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and remit the same wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce tax was only because the appellant was not aware of the non-payment of service tax on the TDS amount. There was no deliberate intention to evade payment of service tax. Therefore, she pleaded that the penalties may be set aside. 2. The learned AR Shri S. Govindarajan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2016-TIOL-660-CESTAT-MUM. 4. Following the said judgments, we hold that the penalties imposed under sections 76 and 78 require to be set aside which we hereby do. The impugned order is modified to the extent of setting aside the penalties imposed under sections 76 and 78 without interfering with the demand of service tax or interest and the penalty imposed under section 77. 5. In the resu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
