2008 (12) TMI 122 - AT - Service Tax

Penalty u/s 76 and 77 - It appears that engagement of the Appellant as a lady for her self-employment is a mitigating factor and contributes to reasonable cause for reduction of penalty under Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty of Rs. 100/- per day imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 is reduced to Rs. 10/- per day and penalty of Rs. 1,000/- imposed under Section 77 is confirmed - Appeal is partly allowed

Summary

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA, in the case of 2008 (12) TMI 122 - CESTAT KOLKATA, heard from both the Appellant, represented by Shri Sukhendu Bhattacharjee, and the Respondent, represented by Shri J.A. Khan. The Appellant argued that they had no intention to evade Service Tax liability and had complied with the law as soon as they realized their liability. The tax liability and interest were deposited for various periods. The Appellant, a Commerce Graduate, had limited knowledge of the new levy of service tax and requested a reduction in penalty. The Departmental Representative argued that the penalty was rightly imposed due to non-compliance with the law. The Tribunal found that the Appellant's lack of understanding of tax matters due to being a self-employed lady was a mitigating factor. Therefore, the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 was reduced from Rs. 100 to Rs. 10 per day, while the penalty under Section 77 was confirmed at Rs. 1,000. The Appeal was partly allowed based on these considerations. The judgement was pronounced and dictated in open court by Shri D.N. Panda, Member (Judicial).