TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 438X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RATE, VERSUS M/S TATA TELESERVICES (MAHARASHTRA) LTD. [ 2023 (2) TMI 734 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] whereby, on a similar question of law raised by the Revenue, this Court considering an earlier decision arising from the very same order did not entertain the Revenue s Appeal and which came to be dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law had arisen for consideration in view of the prio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ii) all penalties are set aside, despite the facts that penalties imposed under Section 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 are mandatory in nature and there was ample ground to allege suppression of facts with malafide intent, the penalties under 78 of the Finance and Rule 15 of CCR, 2004 also should have been upheld? 2. Mr. Jain, learned counsel for the Respondents has drawn our atte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tertain the Revenue s Appeal and which came to be dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law had arisen for consideration in view of the prior pronouncement. We have perused the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in The Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-VII Commissionerate Vs. M/s. Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Limited (supra). From paragraph 14 of the order p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
