https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408650 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The penalty was based on the appellant's failure to deposit service tax, which was rectified promptly upon detection during an audit. As the tax amount along with interest had already been paid, and there was no evidence of deliberate short payment or tax evasion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing compliance and absence of fraudulent intent. en-us Wed, 16 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Nov 2021 17:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408650 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The penalty was based on the appellant's failure to deposit service tax, which was rectified promptly upon detection during an audit. As the tax amount along with interest had already been paid, and there was no evidence of deliberate short payment or tax evasion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing compliance and absence of fraudulent intent. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 16 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408650