2018 (5) TMI 676

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri N. Quidir Hoseyn, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench These appeals filed by the same assessee are heard together and are disposed by this common order. 2. In Appeal No. ST/718/2010, service tax demand is confirmed on the Visa charges paid by the appellant holding that the appellant is liable to pay service tax for the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hipowners Association -2010 (17) STR J57 (SC). He submitted that the appellant is not contesting the demand of service tax or the interest thereon and is confining the contest only on the penalty imposed under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. That since the issue was contentious, there was no suppression of facts or intention to evade payment of duty and therefore the penalty may be set aside.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....belief that such activities do not fall under the category of Business Support Services. The appellant had failed to discharge the service tax only on the wrong interpretation of the provisions. That the Tribunal in the above stated final order has set aside the penalties imposed. 5. The ld. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 6. Heard both sides. 7....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....interpretation of the said provision under section 65(104c). The Tribunal in the said final order had set aside the penalty imposed under section 76 without disturbing the penalty imposed under section 77 as well as the demand and the interest thereon. Further, in ST/720/2010, both penalties under sections 76 and 78 have been imposed. As rightly argued by the ld. counsel, both penalties cannot sus....