TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (8) TMI 736
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... N. Kumar, J. - This appeal is by the revenue challenging the order passed by the Tribunal which has set aside the order passed by the Revisional Authority imposing penalty under the Finance Act of 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The assessee, M/s. Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc. having their corporate headquarters at 8283, Grensboro Drive, Mclean, Virginia, USA., had their offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vice tax. In the alternative, they agree to pay the tax payable but also interest on the said tax payable. The assessee further contended that under the agreement entered with the customer, the customer was expected to pay the service tax. Under these circumstances, it did not pay the tax and therefore penalty imposed should be waived. The assessing authority held that the service tax was payable.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he case, the CESTAT, SZB Bangalore was legal and correct in setting aside penalty imposed under Section 76. Section 77 and Section 78 of the Act, when the case involved suppression of facts and contravention of provisions of the Act, with intent to evade payment of service tax? (2) Whether the contract contrary to statute would absolve the liability of the respondent from payment of penalty....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ustomer at Bangalore was expected to pay service tax and then claim from the assessee. Admittedly, the customer at Bangalore, which is instrumentality of the State, has not paid any tax. It is in those circumstances the notice came to be issued realizing the mistake. In the facts of this particular case, we are satisfied that assessing authority was justified in exercising discretion and taking le....