2024 (7) TMI 759

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....spondent being a Public Sector Undertaking and yet not paying the Service Tax due in this case ought to be considered to be "reasonable cause"? iii) Whether the ratio in the case of HUDCO [2012 (26) STR 531 (T-Ahd)] were correctly understood and applied in this case by the Hon'ble CESTAT, Mumbai? iv) Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT, Mumbai was correct in holding that various penalties ought not to have been imposed under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act? v) Whether after holding that the various penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 were imposable, they ought to have been waived? vi) Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT, Mumbai was correct in holding that taking note of the fact that the Respondent is a public sector undertaking the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 10,000/- for failure to take registration within specified timeline and for not having properly self assessed their service tax liabilities was also imposed. 4. Respondent filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The appeal came to be disposed by the CESTAT vide an order dated 8th June 2020 partly holding in favour of appellant. The CESTAT upheld the demand of tax and interest but as regards the penalty that was imposed on respondent, set aside the order passed by the Commissioner. Ms. Menon stated that to the extent the CESTAT held against respondent, respondent has preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court which is still pending. 5. As regards the rejection of imposition of pen....