https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267527 The Tribunal rejected the appellant's miscellaneous application to raise additional grounds under Rule 10 of the CESTAT Rules due to a significant delay in filing and the appellant's concession on the issue before the adjudicating authority. The appellant's attempt to dispute the service tax liability after conceding the issue and the delay were deemed unacceptable. The Tribunal upheld the penalties imposed under the Finance Act, 1994, emphasizing the appellant's failure to deposit collected service tax into the government account, leading to the rejection of the appeal for lacking merit. en-us Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267527 The Tribunal rejected the appellant's miscellaneous application to raise additional grounds under Rule 10 of the CESTAT Rules due to a significant delay in filing and the appellant's concession on the issue before the adjudicating authority. The appellant's attempt to dispute the service tax liability after conceding the issue and the delay were deemed unacceptable. The Tribunal upheld the penalties imposed under the Finance Act, 1994, emphasizing the appellant's failure to deposit collected service tax into the government account, leading to the rejection of the appeal for lacking merit. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267527