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>Appellate Tribunal upholds service tax liability but sets aside penalties under Section 80 Finance Act 1994.</h1> <h3>Icchamani Lawns Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs Nashik</h3> Icchamani Lawns Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs Nashik - 2016 (45) S.T.R. 525 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues: Undervaluation of amounts received for catering services and mandap-keeper services leading to service tax liability and penaltiesIn the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI, the issue at hand was the undervaluation of amounts received for catering services and mandap-keeper services during a specific period. The appellant had suppressed the assessable value, leading to a service tax liability. The appellant accepted the tax liability and paid the same with interest, seeking leniency in the non-imposition of penalties. The main contention was that the appellant believed in good faith that service tax liability did not apply to amounts received for marriage functions, considering them as religious functions.The Tribunal noted that the appellant did not contest the tax liability on its merits and had already paid the tax along with interest. Therefore, the tax liability for the period was upheld. However, regarding penalties, the Tribunal considered the circumstances of the case. It observed that the appellant may have genuinely believed that service tax did not apply to amounts received for marriage functions due to the historical classification of marriage as a religious function. The definition of 'mandap-keeper' was amended in 2007 to include social functions like marriages and religious functions. In the absence of contrary evidence, the Tribunal found that the appellant's belief was reasonable and could have led to the non-payment of service tax. Consequently, the Tribunal invoked Section 80 of the Finance Act 1994 to set aside the penalties while upholding the service tax liability and interest.In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal by setting aside the penalties imposed, upholding the service tax liability and interest, and invoking the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act 1994 in favor of the appellant.
TaxTMI 