Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was sustainable, or whether Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 could be invoked to waive the penalty on the facts of the case.
Analysis: The dispute before the Tribunal was confined to the penalty, as the tax and interest had already been paid. The appellant was a statutory body engaged in welfare-oriented functions and had undertaken training activities in the bona fide belief that such activities would not attract service tax. The appellant had also sought clarification through its Ministry, paid the tax and interest immediately after receiving the clarification, and thereafter obtained registration for service tax compliance. In the absence of any material showing an intention to evade tax, the Tribunal treated these circumstances as constituting reasonable cause for the default.
Conclusion: Section 80 was held applicable, and the penalty under Section 78 was set aside.