https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312945 The Tribunal overturned the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, granting the appellant the cum tax benefit by recognizing the charged amount as a cum-tax price. It set aside the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, citing the Raval Trading Co. precedent against simultaneous penalties. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to recalculate the service tax payable, considering the cum tax benefit. The appeal was allowed, directing further action by the adjudicating authority. en-us Wed, 04 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Mar 2024 17:15:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312945 The Tribunal overturned the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, granting the appellant the cum tax benefit by recognizing the charged amount as a cum-tax price. It set aside the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, citing the Raval Trading Co. precedent against simultaneous penalties. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to recalculate the service tax payable, considering the cum tax benefit. The appeal was allowed, directing further action by the adjudicating authority. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312945