https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32916 Repeated delays in depositing service tax and filing returns, ranging from 1 to 292 days, were treated as continued non-compliance under the penalty provisions. The appellate authority had already taken a lenient view and substantially reduced the penalties, but the appellant, despite being a registered service provider and having paid the tax with interest, offered no sufficient justification for the repeated defaults. On that basis, no further reduction in penalty under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 was considered warranted, and the appeal was rejected. en-us Mon, 09 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32916 Repeated delays in depositing service tax and filing returns, ranging from 1 to 292 days, were treated as continued non-compliance under the penalty provisions. The appellate authority had already taken a lenient view and substantially reduced the penalties, but the appellant, despite being a registered service provider and having paid the tax with interest, offered no sufficient justification for the repeated defaults. On that basis, no further reduction in penalty under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 was considered warranted, and the appeal was rejected. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 09 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32916