2005 (6) TMI 543

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....asimhan and K. Srinath, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri U. Raja Ram, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The appellants in these cases are providers of cell phone service. Under the impugned orders, there are demands for service tax on the cell phone service and penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and also demand for interest. 2. We have perused the records an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... failure." Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants were paying service tax in respect of the amount collected for the telephone service. Failure to pay tax was limited to amounts charged for the SIM card and activation charge. It is being submitted that these charges were considered as sale of goods which attracted sales tax. The appellants were thus paying sales tax. The....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ivation charge were not part of sale of telephone service. He therefore, contends that this is a case of suppression of value of service provided with intent to evade service tax and thus, penalty under Section 78 is justified. 6. We find merit in the contention of the appellant with regard to penalty. The facts and circumstances leading to the dispute lend to that conclusion only. The app....