9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1063X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs. CST, Chennai [2008 (5) TMI 80 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] has appreciated identical situation and has observed that the assessee having acted on account of inadvertent mistake of accountant, the imposition of penalty upon the assessee was not justified - when the consideration of service tax in respect of which no service tax liability discharged was shown in the returns, there could be no mala fide o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y accordingly. It is seen that in the month of January, 2008, certain transactions were left out of consideration and service tax liability was not calculated in respect of the same. 3. Initially, the service tax demand for the period October, 2007 to March, 2008 was raised. This stands reduced by the authorities below on the ground that the above transactions were done in January, 2008, confir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lected the value of the said services in their returns. The fact that the entire consideration was reflected in ST3 returns and short payment was on account of arithmetic calculations or non-consideration of certain considerations on account of mistake on the part of the accountant who handled the computer, the same should not result in fastening any penal liability upon the appellant. Ld. Advocat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsideration of service tax in respect of which no service tax liability discharged was shown in the returns, there could be no mala fide on their part so as to evade the payment of service tax. As such, by adopting the ratio of the above referred decision, we are of the view that the penalty imposed upon the assessee is not justified. Accordingly, the same is set aside. 7. The appeal is di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
