2018 (5) TMI 981

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Chartered Accountant, for appellant Shri Atul Sharma, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for respondent In all the four appeals, the appellants have challenged imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellants are not disputing the levy of service tax and interest which were paid in case of Nimbeshwar Mahadeo Built Home even prior to the search conducted and in all oth .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t, which is pending. In these facts, the intention to evade the service tax does not establish. Hence the penalty under Section 78 was not imposable. 3. Shri Atul Sharma, learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue, reiterates the finding of the impugned order. He submits that the appellants knowingly neither paid the service tax in time nor declared the value to the de .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... This Tribunal time and again in identical issue waived the penalty. Relying on the fact that the matter was under litigation in the case of MCHI before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, therefore, in the present case also, the same benefit can be extended to the appellants. Accordingly, I set aside the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act. The impugned order is modified to the above e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X