https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201405 Penalty under Sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was sustained because the assessee, acting as a commission agent, collected service charges, issued bills showing service tax, and failed to obtain timely registration or disclose receipts in returns; the plea of bona fide belief was rejected. The concessional penalty benefit was nevertheless made available because the adjudicating and appellate orders did not expressly deny the option to pay the reduced penalty within the stipulated period. The penalty findings remained intact, but relief was confined to payment of the reduced amount on time. en-us Wed, 25 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Jan 2011 23:19:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201405 Penalty under Sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was sustained because the assessee, acting as a commission agent, collected service charges, issued bills showing service tax, and failed to obtain timely registration or disclose receipts in returns; the plea of bona fide belief was rejected. The concessional penalty benefit was nevertheless made available because the adjudicating and appellate orders did not expressly deny the option to pay the reduced penalty within the stipulated period. The penalty findings remained intact, but relief was confined to payment of the reduced amount on time. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 25 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201405