https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327918 The appeal challenged the imposition of penalty under Section 78 and late fee for service tax liability exceeding the turnover limit in 2011-12. The Member (Judicial) found the appellant eligible for immunity under Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, due to prompt payment upon department notification and lack of mala fide intent. Consequently, the penalty under Section 78 was waived, but the late fee was maintained as per the Commissioner's order. The appeal was partly allowed, resulting in the waiver of penalty and retention of the late fee. en-us Tue, 02 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Oct 2016 11:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327918 The appeal challenged the imposition of penalty under Section 78 and late fee for service tax liability exceeding the turnover limit in 2011-12. The Member (Judicial) found the appellant eligible for immunity under Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, due to prompt payment upon department notification and lack of mala fide intent. Consequently, the penalty under Section 78 was waived, but the late fee was maintained as per the Commissioner's order. The appeal was partly allowed, resulting in the waiver of penalty and retention of the late fee. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 02 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327918