Abhishek Raja "Ram"
3 days ago
šš²ššš®š šš¼š¹šøš®šš® š„šš¹š¶š»š“ š¼š» š£š²š»š®š¹šš ššŗšŗšš»š¶šš šš»š±š²šæ š¦š²š°šš¶š¼š» š“š¬ š¢ š§šµš² š§šæš¶šÆšš»š®š¹ šµš²š¹š±: "As the amount of Service tax has already been paid under reverse charge and appropriated against the demand made to the Appellant, the Appellant is entitled to immunity from imposing penalty. Appeal allowed."
š šš®š°šš: šš½š½š²š¹š¹š®š»š: M/s Jagati Cokes Private Limited ššššš²: Non-payment of Service tax under reverse charge mechanism was later discharged; penalties under Sections 77 and 78 were contested.
āļø ššš±š“š²šŗš²š»š: The Tribunal held that since Service tax was paid and appropriated, the appellant qualified for immunity from penalties under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. Penalties under Sections 77 and 78 were set aside, while the dropped penalty under Section 76 was upheld, citing reasonable cause for non-compliance.
š šš®šš² šš»š³š¼šæšŗš®šš¶š¼š»: š§š¶šš¹š²: M/s Jagati Cokes Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata š¢šæš±š²šæ šš®šš²: 28 February 2023 š This ruling underscores that when Service tax is paid and appropriated, immunity from penalty can be availed under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.
Page created with TweetHunter
Write your own