<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Penalty Under Finance Act Section 78 Challenged: No Evidence of Intentional Tax Evasion by Public Sector Undertaking.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=55551</link>
    <description>Levy of Penalty u/s 78 of FA - There are no positive evidence has been brought on record in the entire proceedings that non-payment of tax was attributable to reasons to deliberately evade payment of tax. - Moreover, the appellant is a PSU in the instant case. The Courts have consistently held that there is a presumption that PSU would not have intention to evade payment of duty or tax. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:10:20 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:10:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=627985" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Penalty Under Finance Act Section 78 Challenged: No Evidence of Intentional Tax Evasion by Public Sector Undertaking.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=55551</link>
      <description>Levy of Penalty u/s 78 of FA - There are no positive evidence has been brought on record in the entire proceedings that non-payment of tax was attributable to reasons to deliberately evade payment of tax. - Moreover, the appellant is a PSU in the instant case. The Courts have consistently held that there is a presumption that PSU would not have intention to evade payment of duty or tax. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:10:20 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=55551</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>