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>Appeal admitted on Service Tax demand justification & penalty imposition under Finance Act</h1> <h3>Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Versus Commissioner</h3> The High Court of Bombay admitted an appeal concerning the justification of upholding demand for an extended period without deliberate withholding of ... Maintainability of appeal - Business Auxiliary Service - co-branding of hose pipes (by manufacturers and HPCL) as well as printing logo - the decision in the case of HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI [2014 (11) TMI 166 - CESTAT MUMBAI], contested - Held that: - appeal admitted - service waived by respondent. The High Court of Bombay admitted an appeal based on substantial questions of law related to the justification of upholding demand for extended period without deliberate withholding of information to evade Service Tax, sustaining penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, and the relationship between penalty under section 78 and Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The respondent waived service.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
