Penalty under Section 76, 77 or 78 - respondents got themselves ...

Case Laws Service Tax

January 8, 2014

Penalty under Section 76, 77 or 78 - respondents got themselves registered with the Revenue suo motu and paid the service tax along with interest before the issue of the show cause notice - no penalty - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty under Section 76, 77 or 78 - respondents got themselves ...

Case Laws Service Tax

January 8, 2014

You may also like:

Levy of penalty u/s 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - evasion of service tax - appellant collected service tax from the service receivers but failed to deposit the...

Suo motu adjustment of excess service tax paid – Rule 6(4A) - stay granted.

Non-discharge of service tax - extended period invoked, service tax demanded - penalties imposed u/ss 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 - appellant providing taxable...

Dispute regarding non-payment/short payment of service tax, tax demand and interest u/ss 73(2) and 75, penalties u/ss 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, and extended...

Demand of service tax from the Sub-contractor - Demand of service tax with interest confirmed - Levy of penalty u/s 77 & 78 waived invoking the provisions of section 80- AT

Levy of penalty u/s 78 of FA - services received from abroad, but service tax not paid - even if the appellant pays service tax, they would be eligible for the credit...

Penalty u/s 77, 78 and under Rule 7(C) - delayed payment of service tax - appellant approached their customer and requested them to pay service tax but their client did...

Levy of penalty - in case of confirmation of demand u/s 73(A) there is no application of Section 76 and 78 for imposition of penalty. Therefore, the adjudicating...

Penalty u/s 76, 77, and 78 - service tax with interest deposited before issuance of show cause notice - import of services - Stay granted - AT

Restoration of penalty imposed u/s 76, 77 and 78 of FA - On being pointed out, the assessee has immediately paid the service tax along with interest. Given this factual...

Services rendered by appellant classified as works contract services, attracting service tax liability. Appellant failed to obtain service tax registration and pay...

Levy of penalty u/s 77 and 78 of FA - there was no suppression of fact with an intention to evade payment of tax, established in this case. Since the Appellant has...

Classification of services - Franchise Service or Business Auxiliary Service? - Race Promotion Contract - The CESTAT found that the contract did not constitute a...

Levy of penalties u/s 77 and 78 - Bonafide belief - assessee had in fact recovered Service Tax periodically from the service recipient. Not only that such service tax...

Penalty u/s 70, 77 and 78 of FA - non-filing of ST-3 return would not amount to suppression of facts, with intent to defraud Government revenue, unless it is...

Quick Updates: