Levy of penalty - There are no reason why the said benefit ...

Tribunal's Rs. 1,00,000 penalty u/s 78 overturned; Section 80 benefits overlooked, decision deemed unjust.

April 16, 2021

Case Laws Service Tax HC

Levy of penalty - There are no reason why the said benefit cannot be extended to the penalty imposed under Section 76, since both the Sections are to be read along with Section 80, which gives an overriding effect over Sections 76 to 78. The impugned order passed by the Tribunal which denied the said benefit to the petitioner qua the penalty imposed under Section 78 to the tune of 1,00,000/-, is therefore a gross injustice and deserve ₹ to be set aside on account of non-consideration of Section 80 of the Act. - HC

View Source

← Previous Next →

Levy of penalty - There are no reason why the said benefit ...

Tribunal's Rs. 1,00,000 penalty u/s 78 overturned; Section 80 benefits overlooked, decision deemed unjust.

April 16, 2021

Case Laws Service Tax HC

You may also like:

The Appellate Tribunal found the Appellant Company guilty of contravening u/s 9(1)(a) of FERA 1973 by making payments to a person outside India without RBI permission....

The case involves imposition of penalty on a Customs House Agent (CHA) u/s 114 (iii) of the Customs Act 1962 for misusing drawback benefit through fraudulent exports....

Penalty for violation of Section 15HB of SEBI Act, 1992 - justification for the Tribunal to reduce the penalty below Rs. 1,00,000/- which is the minimum as permissible -...

CESTAT upheld reclassification of imported high conductivity copper bus bars from CTI 7407 21 20 to CTI 7407 10 30, resulting in denial of FTA benefits under N/N....

Appellant failed to submit required documents within stipulated time for provisional duty assessment, contravening Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations,...

HC addressed valuation dispute regarding exported Printed Circuit Boards where penalty was significantly increased from Rs.1,00,000 to Rs.1,00,00,000 in subsequent...

The Appellate Tribunal held that for determining the holding period of a property or calculating long-term capital gains, the date of allotment of the property is...

Imported goods classification disputed - whether silver jewellery freely importable or restricted category under ITC (HS) Code 71069210. Court found respondent's...

Applicability of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) provisions to a non-resident bank and its CEO. The bank was charged with contravening sections 64(2), 6(4),...

The CESTAT upheld the duty demand, confiscation of imported goods for non-fulfilment of export obligation u/s 111(o), imposition of redemption fine u/s 125, and...

The AT found evidence of hawala transactions through a recovered notebook containing daily business accounts, despite the appellant's retraction. The tribunal...

CESTAT ruled in favor of the appellant regarding 17 previous Bills of Entry, finding that the test report from a later import (Bill of Entry No. 4199210) could not...

The AT set aside penalties of Rs.4,00,000/- and Rs.6,00,000/- imposed on the appellant under FEMA. Despite allegations that the appellant assisted in preparing forged...

Levy of penalty u/s 112(a) and u/s 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 - allegation of abetment in undervaluation - evasion of Customs Duty by several syndicates of crane...

ITAT upheld partial rejection of books under s.145(3) due to unverifiable self-made cash vouchers, though specific quantification was lacking. Given turnover of...

Quick Updates: