https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242392 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore rejected the Revenue's appeal against the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal upheld the impugned order setting aside the penalty based on the proviso to Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, and a Circular issued by the Board. It emphasized that statutory provisions did not differentiate between habitual and non-habitual defaulters in such cases, highlighting the importance of complying with service tax payment requirements to avoid penalties. en-us Fri, 15 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242392 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore rejected the Revenue's appeal against the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal upheld the impugned order setting aside the penalty based on the proviso to Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, and a Circular issued by the Board. It emphasized that statutory provisions did not differentiate between habitual and non-habitual defaulters in such cases, highlighting the importance of complying with service tax payment requirements to avoid penalties. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 15 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242392