https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351568 The Tribunal upheld the decision to set aside the penalty under sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, finding no evidence of material fact suppression by the assessee to evade service tax payment. The judgment emphasized the appellant's liability as a service provider post land transfer, exclusion of land cost for tax computation, and entitlement to abatement under the relevant notification. The Tribunal's detailed analysis supported the dismissal of the revenue's appeal, highlighting the lack of evidence supporting the revenue's claims of material fact suppression. en-us Mon, 16 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:37:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351568 The Tribunal upheld the decision to set aside the penalty under sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, finding no evidence of material fact suppression by the assessee to evade service tax payment. The judgment emphasized the appellant's liability as a service provider post land transfer, exclusion of land cost for tax computation, and entitlement to abatement under the relevant notification. The Tribunal's detailed analysis supported the dismissal of the revenue's appeal, highlighting the lack of evidence supporting the revenue's claims of material fact suppression. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 16 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351568