https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76742 The Tribunal upheld the liability of the appellant to pay service tax, emphasizing the lack of dispute regarding the liability due to commission income. Despite financial difficulties cited for the delay in payment, the Tribunal denied leniency in penalties under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the significant turnover of the appellant. Referring to legal precedents, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, highlighting that a bonafide belief does not excuse delayed compliance and distinguishing between penalties under Section 76 & 78. The appellant's arguments were deemed lacking merit based on the facts and legal precedents cited. en-us Fri, 30 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76742 The Tribunal upheld the liability of the appellant to pay service tax, emphasizing the lack of dispute regarding the liability due to commission income. Despite financial difficulties cited for the delay in payment, the Tribunal denied leniency in penalties under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the significant turnover of the appellant. Referring to legal precedents, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, highlighting that a bonafide belief does not excuse delayed compliance and distinguishing between penalties under Section 76 & 78. The appellant's arguments were deemed lacking merit based on the facts and legal precedents cited. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 30 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76742