9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 954X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest and penalty u/s 78 - Held that: - appellant could have entertained a bona fide belief that having constructed houses for MHADA they need not discharge any tax liability as MHADA being a Government of Maharashtra undertaking - appellant was an unemployed engineer and has claimed it so to get the tender for construction of such houses - by invoking the provisions of Section 80 of the FA, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ory of construction of complex and residential complex under Section 65(30a) and 65(91a) of the Finance Act, 1994 for construction of residential houses under the scheme of Valmiki Ambedkar Awas Yojana. It was the case of the appellant that this construction of houses were undertaken by them for Maharashtra Housing Development Board (MHADA) and hence not taxable as they are doing the job for Mah ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l instructions vide letter dated 27/07/2005 would directly apply and the tax liability along with interest needs to be upheld and we do so. 5. It is also on record that the appellant had admitted the tax liability and discharged interest thereof. The first appellate authority has recorded a finding that the appellant is liable to be penalized under Section 76 and 78, but reduced the penalty und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... truction of such houses. We are of the considered view that appellant could have entertained a bona fide belief that he need not discharge tax liability. Accordingly, by invoking the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, as it was during the relevant period, we set aside the penalties imposed under Section 76 by the lower authorities. 7. The appeal is disposed off as indicated here ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
