Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance no 2 act 1980 section 5 amendment of section 16 Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat mumbai Page 4 of about 31 results (0.179 seconds)

Status Car Rentals Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)9STR83

..... 1,04,658/- while interpreting the scope and object of section 76 of the finance act and relying upon the large bench decision in the case of eta engineering limited v.commissioner of central excise, ..... show cause notice was issued, on 7.1.2002 for contravention of the provisions under section 68 and section 70 of the finance act, 1994 and proposing penalty under section 76 and section 77 ibid. ..... /- as imposed by the assistant commissioner under section 76 of the finance act. ..... assessee is engaged in rendering tour operator services and got registered under the provisions of finance act 1994. ..... exercised the discretion which is not vested with him and further more no reason has been assigned properly within the meaning of section 80 in establishing the fact of reasonable cause for failure to pay the tax amount and failure to file returns. ..... on appreciation of the above referred circumstances, the appellant also pleads for completed waiver of penalty amount as provided under section 80 on the ground that they have established and shown reasonable cause. ..... respect of waiver of penalty amount as provided under section 80, the ld. ..... 4000/- under section 76 and ..... vouchers as submitted before him by the assessee or would be submitted during the personal hearing during the denova proceedings shall take into consideration and decide the matter afresh including the plea of section 80. ..... reason could be fit better than what is shown as the defiance in their reply notice for the purpose invoking section 80. .....

Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai and Another Vs. P.N. Writer and Co ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... the taxable services in relation to storage and warehousing has been defined in section 65(105)(zza) of finance act as any service provided to any person by a storage and warehouse keeper in relation to storage ..... the view that the activities undertaken by the appellant comes under the category of taxable service of storage and warehousing as defined in section 65(102) of the finance act, 1994 and therefore, they are liable to pay service tax on the said activity under section 65(105)(zza) of the said finance act. ..... accounts, in respect of which the service was rendered by the appellant to his clients such as banks and corporate houses for management of the records, cannot be considered as storage and warehousing of goods as defined in the finance act, 1994 read with section 2(7) of the sale of goods act, 1930. 8. ..... submits that the provisions relating to storage and warehousing under section 65(102) and 65(105)(zza) of the finance act applies only in respect of goods as defined in the sale of goods act, 1930. ..... the revenue, on the other hand, submits that the activity undertaken by the appellant would come under the purview of storage and warehousing services as defined in section 65(102) and 65(105)zza of the finance act, 1994. ..... 2010 confirming the service tax demand of rs.3,21,11,343 classifying the service rendered by the appellant under storage and warehousing services along with interest thereon and also imposing a penalty under section 76 and 78 of the finance act, 1994. .....

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Madhuri Travels

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... cc nasik 2006 (2) str 205 the tribunal relied upon section 80 of the finance act, 1994 which provides that "notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of section 76, 77, 78 and 79 no penalty shall be imposable on the assessee for any j failure referred to in the said provisions, if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure", to reduce the penalty imposed ..... that the commissioner (appeals) while reducing the penalty imposed under section 76 has invoked the provisions of section 80 of the finance act, 1994. ..... he reads the section 76 of the finance act, 1994 and submits that minimum penalty ..... appeals) on the ground that the commissioner (appeals) has reduced the penalty imposed under the provisions of section 76 of the finance act, 1994. ..... on the other hand submits that in an identical issue wherein the tribunal had reduced the penalty under section 76, revenue had taken it up in appeal to the hon'ble high court in civil appeal no.213 ..... in other words, the high court held that on consideration of section 76 and 80, there is discretion in the authority of not imposing ..... jdr that the provisions of section 76 have no mandate for reduction of ..... of the jdr is that this would amounts to rewriting of the section, in the statute. ..... is mandatory and penalty imposed under this section cannot be reduced.5. ..... the penalty under section 77 is upheld.9 ..... grievance mainly is that the commissioner (appeal) does not have any power to reduce the penalty imposed under section 76. .....

Jagdish Oil Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... the assessment was completed but the commissioner under the powers under section 84 of the finance act, 1994 revised the assessment and hold that the appellant has willfully suppressed the fact from the department regarding the activities of business auxiliary service with intent to evade service tax due thereon and confirmed the various penalties under section 76,77 and78 of the finance act. ..... the learned advocates submission that the commissioner did not give them the benefit of section 80 of the finance act, while deciding the case. ..... per : ashok jindal, member (judicial) the appeal is against the revisional order confirming the penalties on the appellant under section 76,77 and 78 of the finance act, 1994. 2. .....

M/S. Sharon Engineering Services Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, N ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... accordingly, i hold that the appellant is liable to penalty under section 78 of the finance act equal to the service tax defaulted. ..... penalties of late filing of returns were imposed under section 77 and penalty for late payment of service tax was imposed equal to the default in service tax payment separately under section 76 as well as 78 of the finance act, 1994. ..... accordingly, i set aside the penalty imposed under section 76 of the finance act, 1994 and uphold that under section 78. ..... inasmuch as there is a delay in payment of service tax, the appellant is liable to pay interest thereon on the defaulted payment under section 75 of the finance act, 1994. ..... 6.2 now coming to the penalties, penalties have been imposed under section 76 for delay in payment of service tax, under section 77 for filing of returns belatedly and under section 78 for suppressing the fact of receipt of service tax from the customer. ..... as regards the penalty under section 76 and 78, i am of the view that the penalty under one of the said provisions will suffice considering the fact that the appellant is a small service provider. .....

Allied Instruments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)LC634Tri(Mum.)bai

..... the orders of the deputy commissioner, in view of the retrospective amendment of service tax rules by section 117 of the finance act, 2000, which states that notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment, decree or order of any court, tribunal or other authority, sub-clause (xii) and (xvii) of clause (d) of sub-rule (1) of rule 2 of service tax rules/1994 as they stood immediately before the commencement of the service tax (amendment) rules, 1998 shall be deemed to be valid as if the ..... provided to them during the period 16-11-1997 to 1-6-1998 since they had neither applied for registration with the central excise authorities nor paid the service tax, hence contravening the sections 68 and 70 of the finance act, 1994, directing them to furnish quarterly return in form st-3 and proposing recovery of interest for delayed payment of tax and proposing penal action under ..... view of the above, the plea that other sections of the finance act, 2000, namely, section 109, 110 and 112 relating to validation of past actions of other subject matters also provides for recovery of duties not collected whereas section 117(2) of the finance act, 2000 does not contain similar provision, is not ..... the case law cited by the learned counsel for the appellants to support the argument that section 112(1) of the finance act, 2000 validates only refunds already granted and does not validate recovery and collection in cases where such collection has not been made and hence the tribunal cannot fill up the .....

M/S. Alert Intelligence Management Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... per : ashok jindal, member (judicial) the appellant has filed this appeal along with the stay petition against the order of upholding the confirmation of service tax of rs.20,037/- under section 71 with interest under section 75 of the finance act, and the penalties of rs. ..... 2,50,262/- @ 8% therefore suppressed the value of taxable services from the department with intent to evade the payment of service tax as such the provisions of section 73(1) of chapter v of finance act, 1994 is applicable in this case. 3. ..... further the appellant neither filed st-3 return for the half year ending march 2004, september 2004 and march 2005 nor paid service tax and therefore they have contravened the provisions of section 68 and section 70 of finance act, 1994. 4. ..... 3,000/- under section 77 of the finance act. 2. ..... 20,037/- under section 76 and equivalent amount of penalty under section 78 and a penalty of rs. .....

Stellar Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)(146)ELT388Tri(Mum.)bai

..... 92,400/- imposed for contravention of section 76 and section 77 of the finance act, 1994 for late payment of tax as well as for late filing of service tax returns, i proceed to hear the appeal itself with the consent of both sides.2. ..... in the result i set aside the penalty imposed under section 76, and uphold the penalty imposed under section 77 of the finance act, 1994. ..... 4,600/- imposed in terms of section 77 of the finance act, 1994 is sustainable. ..... 87,800/- imposed under section 76 of the finance act, 1994. ..... 4,600/- under section 77 of the finance act, 1994. ..... since they failed to do so show cause notice was issued proposing penalty under section 77 of the finance act, 1994. ..... as per section 70(1) of chapter v of the finance act 1994, they were required to file their return in form st-3 for the quarter ending september, 1997, december, 1997, march, 1998, september, 1998 and march, 1999 within the stipulated period. ..... the commissioner (appeals) has accepted that there is no speaking order by the assistant commissioner for imposition of penalty under section 76 therefore he should have set aside the penalty imposed under this section and should not have upheld it on the ground that the negligence on the part of the assistant commissioner in giving reasons for imposing penalty under section 76 of the act, is to be ignored. ..... 87,800/- under section 76, and rs. .....

Ar. Ashish V. Patil Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2006)(112)ECC150

..... the appellant being a small tax payer, the revised penalty imposed by the commissioner is unduly harsh on him, accordingly, i set aside the impugned order and restore the penalty amount under section 76 of the finance act, 1994 to the originally determined amount of rs. ..... i find that the commissioner has totally overlooked the provision of section 80 of the finance act, 1994 which reads as under. ..... 1,000/- under section 77 of the finance act, 1994.the impugned order has been passed by the jurisdictional commissioner revising the order of the original authority and enhancing the penalty of rs. ..... the appellant's case squarely falls under the provision of section 80 of the finance act, 1994. ..... notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of section 76, section 77, section 78 or section 79, no penalty shall be imposable on the assessee for any failure referred to in the said provisions, if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure.i also find that the appellant has ..... 4,000/- under section 76 and a penalty of rs. ..... 4,000/- under section 76 to rs. .....

Agarwal Trading Co. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2007)9STJ99CESTAT(Mum.)bai

..... number of day's delays in depositing the service tax.for the said purpose, i set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for recalculation of penalty amount in terms of the section 76 of finance act, 1994 read with the larger bench's decision referred supra. ..... 1,000/- under section 77 of the finance act, 1944 was imposed on the appellants by the assistant commissioner. ..... inasmuch as section 80 of the finance act is not attracted in the present case, minimum penalty of rs. ..... cce, chennai minimum penalty under section 16 of the finance act is rs. ..... 5,000/- under section 76 and rs. .....