2017 (1) TMI 1503

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f evading tax. A bonafide omission will not lead to a conclusion of suppression under Section 78 of the Act. It is a settled proposition that intention of the assessee to suppress must be established in the absence of which no penalty will lie under under Section 78 of the Act - penalty not levied - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C.M.A. No. 1125 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 12-1-2017 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... isions of Section 68 as well as suppresion of facts and non-declaration of the correct value of service tax with intent to evade payment of appropriate tax. 2. An order-in-original dated 21.10.2008 was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax confirming the levy of service tax, but dropping the proposal for levy of penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Act. 3. The assessin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he order of revision passed by the Commissioner in terms of Section 84 of the Act has been confirmed by the CESTAT, against which the assessee is before us in appeal. 5. A perusal of the order of the assessing authority would reveal that the dropping of proceedings for the levy of penalty is not without basis. The Assessing authority has applied his mind to the proposal in the Show Cause Notice .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X