TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellant's Tax Penalty Appeal Remanded for Contract Re-examination</h1> <h3>SCHENCK JENSON & NICHOLSON LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., RANCHI</h3> The appellant challenged the imposition of personal penalty under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the ... - Issues:Challenge to imposition of personal penalty under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994.Analysis:The appellant challenged the imposition of personal penalty under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The advocate for the appellant argued that although the service tax was paid voluntarily, recent Tribunal judgments suggested it was not payable. However, it was acknowledged that the issue of whether consulting engineering services are subject to service tax was not raised before the lower authorities. The Tribunal had previously ruled in cases like Daelim Industrial Co. and Larsen & Toubro Ltd. that certain engineering services should not be taxed. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority to re-examine the contracts in light of these decisions and make a fresh decision. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed on these grounds.This judgment highlights the importance of legal precedents in tax matters and the need for a thorough examination of the facts and applicable law before imposing penalties. It also emphasizes the role of the adjudicating authority in re-evaluating decisions based on new legal interpretations provided by higher courts or tribunals.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
