<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (8) TMI 3 - CESTAT, Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159</link>
    <description>Penalty for delayed payment of service tax was held unwarranted where the levy was new, the delay arose from initial confusion, and the tax with interest was paid after the obligation became known. The breach was treated as bona fide and technical, not deliberate, and penalty must be imposed judicially only where there is conscious disregard of the statutory duty. On those facts, the penalty was not imposable and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2025 10:14:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 3 - CESTAT, Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159</link>
      <description>Penalty for delayed payment of service tax was held unwarranted where the levy was new, the delay arose from initial confusion, and the tax with interest was paid after the obligation became known. The breach was treated as bona fide and technical, not deliberate, and penalty must be imposed judicially only where there is conscious disregard of the statutory duty. On those facts, the penalty was not imposable and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>