2008 (1) TMI 187

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s dispute on levy of tax on the service of the appellant so intention to evade duty is absent so penalty u/s 78 is not justified – appellant didn’t avail amnesty scheme upto November, 2004 but got registered in the month of December, 2004 – delay in filing the return and payment of tax and penalty under Section 75A, 76 and 77 are justified
Shri P. K. Das, Member (J) [Order]-1. The appellants f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s a delay in deposit of the tax. In support of his contention, he placed the relevant portion of the Chartered Accountant Journal for the month of 2004 as well as their letter dated 14-2-2005. He submits that there is no suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of tax and therefore, Section 78 cannot be invoked. That delay in paying tax is due to confusion therefore, Sections 75, 76 and 77 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tration on 6-12-2004. I find that the appellant paid the tax and filed the return in the month of March, 2005. It is seen that the appellants themselves got registration and there was confusion of levy of tax and therefore, there is no material for suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of tax and Section 78 of the Act cannot be invoked. However, the appellants got registration in the mo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X