9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 787X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008 to 2011, even though against the contract they supplied various equipment to M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd. and the said service is taxable under the category of supply of tangible goods for use services. Further, the appellant had not disclosed the provision of the said service to their clients against the respective contracts to the department nor registered with the Service Tax department. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is whether the appellant is liable to penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that during the relevant period, the appellant had provided services under the taxable category of supply of tangible goods for use of services , i.e. supplied dozers and tippers to various clients. However, they failed to discharge service tax of ₹ 16,43,7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stries Ltd., Solapur. As soon as pointed out, the entire amount of service tax along with interest had been paid by them. Therefore, equivalent penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act is unwarranted as there was no intention to evade payment of duty. 5. Per contra, learned AR for the Revenue has pointed out that the appellant has failed to pay the service tax continuously for a period of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid service is taxable under the category of supply of tangible goods for use services. Further, the appellant had not disclosed the provision of the said service to their clients against the respective contracts to the department nor registered with the Service Tax department. In these circumstances, we do not see reason to waive the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Howe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
