https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345880 The respondent, engaged in manufacturing excisable goods and providing services under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS), utilized Service Tax credit leading to penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. The Adjudicating Authority imposed penalties, but the Commissioner (Appeals) set them aside invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The respondent promptly paid the tax upon detection, had the necessary registration certificate, and acted in good faith, resulting in the dismissal of penalties. The judgment aligned with statutory provisions, and the revenue's appeal was rejected by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order. en-us Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Oct 2017 12:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345880 The respondent, engaged in manufacturing excisable goods and providing services under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS), utilized Service Tax credit leading to penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. The Adjudicating Authority imposed penalties, but the Commissioner (Appeals) set them aside invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The respondent promptly paid the tax upon detection, had the necessary registration certificate, and acted in good faith, resulting in the dismissal of penalties. The judgment aligned with statutory provisions, and the revenue's appeal was rejected by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345880