https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267018 The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, holding that penalties under Sections 76 & 78 of the Finance Act 1994 cannot be imposed simultaneously post-amendment. The appellant's appeal was allowed for remand to consider cum-duty benefits and reduced penalty options, as discrepancies in returns indicated an intention to evade tax payment. The Tribunal found the appellant collected Service Tax but failed to remit it, negating claims of financial hardship. en-us Fri, 09 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267018 The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, holding that penalties under Sections 76 & 78 of the Finance Act 1994 cannot be imposed simultaneously post-amendment. The appellant's appeal was allowed for remand to consider cum-duty benefits and reduced penalty options, as discrepancies in returns indicated an intention to evade tax payment. The Tribunal found the appellant collected Service Tax but failed to remit it, negating claims of financial hardship. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 09 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267018