Penalty u/s 78 - suppression of facts - when mandatory penalty ...

Service Tax

July 9, 2018

Penalty u/s 78 - suppression of facts - when mandatory penalty is imposable, whether the duty is paid before issue of show cause notice or after notice cannot alter the penalty.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 78 - suppression of facts - when mandatory penalty ...

Service Tax

July 9, 2018

You may also like:

Imposition of penalty - Advertisement Agency Service - non-payment of Service tax - Section 78 - when the first SCN was issued, the subsequent SCN cannot allege...

Rectification of Mistake - Having held that penalty is not imposable, it cannot be held that penalty under Section 78 would be restricted to the extent of confirmation of demand.

Levy of penalty u/s 78 of FA - Since the elements of fraud, mis-statement or suppression of facts etc. with an intent to evade service tax are not present in the matter...

Penalty u/s 11AC - Duty was paid before issuance of SCN - This only points to wilful misstatement and suppression of facts on the part of the appellant - Penalty confirmed - AT

Imposition of penalties - Mere collection and delay to remit to the Government cannot be considered as an act of suppression - The penalty imposed u/s 78 is unwarranted.

Quantum of mandatory deposit - whether an appellant has to pay 10% mandatory deposit over and above the mandatory deposit of 7.5% of the duty liability/penalties - Held...

Penalty u/s 78 - The SCN was issued merely on audit objections and in view of the various decisions, no suppression can be alleged merely on audit objections.

Levy of penalty u/s 78 - entire Service Tax and interest paid before issuance of SCN - the appellant have not complied with the provision of section 73(3) and...

Imposition of penalty u/s 78 - if the appellant have paid the service tax they are entitled to take credit of the same, it cannot be said that by suppressing the fact...

Penalty u/s 78 - share broking services - in the facts and circumstances of the case, assessee has acted bonafide - neither extended period of limitation is attracted...

Quick Updates: