9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p Keeper" and for the period from 1.2.1998 to 30.6.2002, there was no payment of service tax under tax category of Mandap Keeper. That the respondent was letting out the hall for organising social and cultural functions and was liable to pay tax. Order-in-original was passed confirming the payment of service tax and also interest as well as penalty. The CESTAT has, while confirming the order of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estions of law: (i) Whether the CESTAT was legal and correct in setting aside the penalties imposed under Section 75A, Section 76 and Section 78 of the Act, when the respondent did not prove any reasonable cause for their failure to comply with the provisions mentioned in Section 80 of the Act. In the absence of any reasonable cause, whether waiver of aforesaid penalties by invoking Section 80 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax category of mandap Keeper. That the respondent was letting out the hall for organising social and cultural functions and was liable to pay tax. The said show-cause notice was replied to by the respondents and the same was adjudicated upon and an order-in-original was passed on 31.3.2004 confirming the payment of service tax and also interest as well as penalty. Being aggrieved by the said ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... organising social and cultural functions and was liable to pay service tax under the category of mandap keeper and therefore, confirmed the payment of the said tax made under the said show cause notice. However, when it came to the question of imposing of penalty the tribunal has merely stated that the appellants were under a bonafide belief that they would not be liable to pay service tax penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
