https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779468 CESTAT set aside the portions of the impugned order confirming penalties under Sections 77 and 78(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 and allowed the appeal in part. Tribunal found the appellant had been afforded hearing, paid the reassessed service-tax liability (including required pre-deposit), filed returns, and did not deliberately suppress facts or commit fraud to invoke the extended limitation period. Proceedings were based on information previously submitted by the appellant and penalty imposition was unsustainable in law. The remainder of the assessment upholds the tax determination. en-us Tue, 30 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:30:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779468 CESTAT set aside the portions of the impugned order confirming penalties under Sections 77 and 78(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 and allowed the appeal in part. Tribunal found the appellant had been afforded hearing, paid the reassessed service-tax liability (including required pre-deposit), filed returns, and did not deliberately suppress facts or commit fraud to invoke the extended limitation period. Proceedings were based on information previously submitted by the appellant and penalty imposition was unsustainable in law. The remainder of the assessment upholds the tax determination. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 30 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779468