https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30947 The case involved issues of liability for service tax on taxable services and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant, M/s. Shakti Motors, argued for cum-tax treatment and sought penalty waiver under Section 80 due to confusion regarding service tax liability. The Member (Technical) rejected cum-tax treatment but acknowledged confusion post-Budget 2005. The appellant's immediate tax payment indicated no tax evasion intent, leading to waiver of penalties under Section 80. However, liability for interest payment remained. The appeal was allowed, granting relief by waiving penalties under Section 80 while upholding interest payment liability. en-us Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 17:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30947 The case involved issues of liability for service tax on taxable services and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant, M/s. Shakti Motors, argued for cum-tax treatment and sought penalty waiver under Section 80 due to confusion regarding service tax liability. The Member (Technical) rejected cum-tax treatment but acknowledged confusion post-Budget 2005. The appellant's immediate tax payment indicated no tax evasion intent, leading to waiver of penalties under Section 80. However, liability for interest payment remained. The appeal was allowed, granting relief by waiving penalties under Section 80 while upholding interest payment liability. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30947