Home Highlights March 2017 Year 2017 This

You may also like:

1. Imposition of penalties u/s 77 (2) and 78 of the FA, 1994 - appellant has not been able to justify non-filing of returns with the department or informing the department...

2. 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...

3. Penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - Once all the facts are reflected in the ST-3 Returns as well as in the Balance Sheet, the allegation of suppression of facts is...

4. Penalty u/s 78 of the FA, 1994 - appellant had correctly advised not to challenged the invocation of the extended period of limitation for recovery of service tax though...

5. Penalty u/s 78 - failure to discharge tax - Construction services - both the authorities below have rightly imposed and upheld penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

6. 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...

7. Imposition of penalty - The mens rea is not required to be proved as necessary ingredient for imposition of penalty under sub-section (5) of Section 78, on proving...

8. Benefit of reduced penalty - penalty not deposited - get the benefit of reduced penalty of 25% of the service tax (ST) u/s 78(1) of the FA, 1994, assessee required to...

9. Imposition of penalty u/s 78 - mere non-payment of short-payment of duties or taxes cannot be construed as with an intent to evade duties/taxes. There must be something...

10. Imposition of penalties for the period 2007-08 to 2010-11 - Sections 76 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - if the show cause notices are issued after the date of...

11. Levy of penalty u/s 78 of FA - the appellant paid the service tax and interest for the period from 18.04.2006 onwards before issuance of show cause notice therefore, the...

12. Imposition of penalty u/r 15 of the CCR, 2004 read with Section 78 of the FA, 1994 - after being pointed out by the CERA Audit, the appellant went through its records...

13. Penalty - There was sufficient evidence to establish that the respondent is guilty of suppression of facts - The law laid u/s 78 of the FA, 1994 mandates imposition of...

14. Levy of penalty u/s 78 of FA - Since the elements of fraud, mis-statement or suppression of facts etc. with an intent to evade service tax are not present in the matter...

15. 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...