Tribunal Upholds Penalty Despite Genuine Belief

The Tribunal upheld the penalty under Section 76, equivalent to the Service Tax amount, despite the appellant's plea for leniency due to a genuine belief of non-liability and prior payment of Service Tax, interest, and penalty under Section 78 before the show cause notice. The decision aligned with judicial discipline, following precedents that the penalty under Section 76 should not be less than Rs. 100 per day, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.

---

---

Issues:
1. Contesting penalty under Section 76 for delay in payment of Service Tax.
2. Consideration of leniency in penalty imposition based on payment of Service Tax, interest, and penalty under Section 78 before the show cause notice.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The appellant contested the penalty under Section 76, acknowledging a delay of 4 years in paying Service Tax due to a genuine belief of non-liability. The appellant had paid the Service Tax, interest, and penalty under Section 78 before the show cause notice. The appellant requested leniency specifically regarding the penalty under Section 76.

Issue 2: The Judicial Discipline was followed in upholding the penalty under Section 76, which is equivalent to the amount of Service Tax as per the provisions of Section 76. The Tribunal considered the conflicting decisions in the cases of ETA Engineering Ltd. and Viswanath Karkera. The decision in ETA Engineering Ltd. clarified that the penalty under Section 76 should not be less than Rs. 100 per day. Despite the appellant's request for leniency, the Tribunal upheld the penalty in line with the judicial discipline and dismissed the appeals filed by the appellants.

---