2015 (8) TMI 107

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... but seeks waiver of penalty by invoking the provisions of Section 80 of Finance Act 1994. Learned counsel on behalf of the appellant submitted that in this case there was reasonable cause for the appellants not to have paid service tax on royalty. He submits that the date from which service tax is liable to be paid in respect of services received from abroad attained finality only with the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Indian National Ship Owners Association Vs. Union of India reported in [2009 (13) STR 235 (Bom.)] which has been upheld subsequently by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He submits that once Hon'ble High Court of Bombay decided the issue finally, the appellants paid the entire amount of tax wit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the appellants are exempt and even though there is liability to pay service tax on GTA services as a receiver of services, after 01.04.2008, for outward transportation there is no such liability. As regards his reliance on various decisions, I find that in the case of Mount Housing & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. CCE & S.T, Coimbatore [2014 (35) S.T.R. 389 (Tri.-Chennai)], penalty was imposed only under Section 76 of Finance Act 1994 and in that case a view was taken that provisions of Section 80 could have been invoked. There Tribunal noted that there was confusion about tax liability during the period. In this case I have not noticed any confusion about tax liability. Decision in the case of CST, Bangalore Vs. Fruition Informatics (P) Ltd. [201....