2020 (4) TMI 201

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... : Mr. K. Pandu Rangaiah, Adv for the Appellant Mr. L.V. Rao, A.R. for the Respondent.    [ORDER PER:ASHOK JINDAL] The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order where the demand of service tax has been confirmed against them and penalties under Section 77 & 78 of the Act have also been imposed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the activity o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dicated. Demand of service tax was confirmed, penalty under Section 77 & 78 was also imposed. Against the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was under a bonafide belief that for transportation of goods, no service tax is payable and the service availed of foreign agent to procure purchase order is an export of service, therefore .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on merits we hold that appellant is liable to pay service tax along with interest in question. 7. With regard to penalties, we find that appellant was under bonafide belief that whatever service tax they will pay, they are entitled to take CENVAT credit. Therefore, by invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 we set side the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appellant is at liberty to take .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X