https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247649 The appellant, a partnership firm engaged in civil construction, contested the liability of Service Tax on the construction of residential complexes for a low-income group. Despite admitting tax liability and depositing the tax with interest before the show-cause notice, they faced penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act. The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the penalties as there was no evidence of fraud, collusion, or active concealment, and the appellant had complied with Section 73(3) by paying the tax before the notice was issued. en-us Fri, 03 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 May 2014 13:51:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247649 The appellant, a partnership firm engaged in civil construction, contested the liability of Service Tax on the construction of residential complexes for a low-income group. Despite admitting tax liability and depositing the tax with interest before the show-cause notice, they faced penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act. The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the penalties as there was no evidence of fraud, collusion, or active concealment, and the appellant had complied with Section 73(3) by paying the tax before the notice was issued. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 03 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247649