1

2013 (2) ECS (178) (Tri-Del)

M/s Havells India Limited

There has been a procedural and technical offence, though without any malafide, we deem it fit to put the appellant to some penalty

2

2013 (3) ECS (193) (Tri-Del)

M/s Jaisingh & Neelam Singh Chauhan

Section 76 and 78, prior to amendment of Section 78 with effect from 16.05.2008, operated in different fields and penalty is imposable under both the Sections even if offence committed is in course of same transaction. (Supra).

3

2013(2) ECS (186)

(Tri-Mum)

M/s Standard Chartered Bank

If penalty is imposed under Section 76 and 78, it is necessary to determine the quantum or Service Tax defaulted or evaded. Determination of penalty is integrally connected with the determination of Service Tax liability

4

2013 (4) ECS (191) (Tri-Del)

M/s Ahluwalia Contracts Pvt Limited

Pre-deposit of the entire adjudicated liability including tax/duty, interest and penalty (if any) is normally the sine qua non for triggering the authority of the appellate Commissioner to hear an appeal, whether under provisions of 1994 Act.

5

2014 (1) ECS (51) (H.C-Mad)

M/s Pondicherry Paper Ltd

In terms of Section 75 of the Act, payment of interest is mandatory on every person who fails to deposit the Service Tax or any part thereof to the account of the Central Government within the period prescribed.

6

2014 (2) ECS (246) (Tri-Ahm)

M/s Shivam Security

The assessee could not reason out the non-payment of service tax as well as non filing of the ST-3 returns in time inspite of being registered with the Department.

7

2014 (3) ECS (164) (Tri - Del.)

M/s Jai Singh & Neelam Singh Chauhan

Non payment of duty on commission received for selling the products of Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.- The appellant did not obtain Service Tax registration and did not fi le any returns, thereby not declaring any information regarding the receipt of taxable amount received. Penalty imposed.

8

2014 (3) ECS (174) (Tri - Ahd.)

M/s. Ketan Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd.

Non filing of returns and non payment of service tax in spite of collecting the same from their customers, clearly conveys malafide on the part of the appellant- Penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

9

2014 (3) ECS (179) (Tri -Ahd.)

M/s Indsur Global Limited

No reasonable cause given by the appellant as to why he could not discharge the duty liability although he collected the same from the service recipient and retained with him.

10

2014 (4) ECS (160) (Tri-Del)

M/s. HCL Infosystem Limited

Interest on Cenvat Credit- Liability to interest under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 would arise only on that amount of cenvat credit, both debited in assessee's books of accounts and utilised (taken) for remittance of the assessee's tax liability.

11

2014 (4) ECS (212) (Tri-Del)

M/s. Ankita Constructions

Though the appellant had taken service tax registration in 2005, and subsequently they were regularly receiving payment from NMDC for the services provided, neither any service tax paid nor any return was filed. In case they had any doubt regarding their Service Tax liability, they should have sought clarification from the department or disclosed the amount received by them for taxable Service provided by filling S.T. -3 return.