Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal upholds decision on Service Tax penalty waiver, citing prompt payment and lack of intent.</h1> The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to set aside the penalty under section 76 for a cable operator involved in Service Tax evasion. ... Penalty- The Respondent was engaged in providing service of cable operator. The original Authority held that during the period from 1-4-2003 to 31-12-2005, the Respondent suppressed taxable value of Rs. 23,36,795 and evaded Service Tax amounting to Rs. 2,06,848. The amount of Service Tax was paid prior to issue of show-cause notice. The interest was paid on 21-2-2006 and 18-3-2008 in two instalments. The original Authority confirmed the Service tax demand and interest. He imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,06,848 under section 76 of the Act; he imposed penalty of Rs. 1,000 under section 77 of the Act and a penalty of Rs. 2,06,848 under section 78 of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) by impugned order taking note of the fact that the entire amount of Service tax and interest has been paid, set aside the penalty under section 76 holding that penalty under section 76 and penalty under section 78 are mutually exclusive. He also reduced the penalty under section 78 to 25 per cent of the Service Tax evaded. Held that- setting aside the penalty under section 76 by the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be held to be unreasonable. Further, the Respondent has admittedly paid 25 per cent of the penalty within one month from the date of the order of the original Authority. Therefore, the waiver of penalty in excess of 25 per cent of the Service Tax evaded under section 78 is also justified and, therefore, order of the Commissioner (Appeals) calls for no interference. In view of the above, the Appeal by the Department is rejected. Issues:Appeal against Commissioner (Appeals) order - Service Tax evasion - Imposition of penalties under sections 76 and 78 - Dispute on taxability of service by cable operator - Application of section 80 of Finance Act.Analysis:The case involved an appeal by the Department against the Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding Service Tax evasion by a cable operator. The original Authority found that the operator had suppressed taxable value and evaded Service Tax, leading to the imposition of penalties under sections 76 and 78 of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalty under section 76, considering the payment of Service Tax and interest prior to the show-cause notice. The Department argued for the imposition of both penalties, citing non-payment of Service Tax knowingly by the operator. They relied on legal precedents to support their stance that penalties under sections 76 and 78 can apply simultaneously for the same transactions.The Respondent, represented by their advocate, contended that there was a genuine dispute regarding the taxability of the service provided by cable operators. They highlighted that once the tax liability was clarified, they promptly paid the amount without any intent to evade tax. The Respondent also sought the benefit of section 80 of the Finance Act before the Commissioner (Appeals). They referenced tribunal decisions to support their argument that once a penalty under section 78 is imposed, no penalty should be levied under section 76. The Respondent emphasized the prompt payment of 25% of the penalty within a month of the original Authority's order.Upon considering the submissions from both sides, the Tribunal noted that the tax liability was not in dispute, and the payment was made along with interest. The Tribunal referenced legal precedents and decisions to support the Commissioner (Appeals) ruling to set aside the penalty under section 76. They highlighted that the Respondent had paid 25% of the penalty promptly, justifying the waiver of the penalty exceeding this amount under section 78. The Tribunal concluded that the Commissioner (Appeals) decision was reasonable, and hence, rejected the Department's appeal.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found