https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262535 Cum-tax valuation under Explanation (2) to Section 67 required the service tax demand to be recomputed where tax was not separately recovered, so the demand was reduced on a tax-inclusive basis. Separate penalty under Section 76 was not sustainable once penalty under Section 78 had been imposed for the same contravention, and it was set aside. The appellate forum could also extend the reduced penalty option of 25% under Section 78 where that benefit had not been expressly granted earlier, subject to compliance with the order, and the penalty was modified accordingly. en-us Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262535 Cum-tax valuation under Explanation (2) to Section 67 required the service tax demand to be recomputed where tax was not separately recovered, so the demand was reduced on a tax-inclusive basis. Separate penalty under Section 76 was not sustainable once penalty under Section 78 had been imposed for the same contravention, and it was set aside. The appellate forum could also extend the reduced penalty option of 25% under Section 78 where that benefit had not been expressly granted earlier, subject to compliance with the order, and the penalty was modified accordingly. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262535