Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Service Tax

Penalty under Section 76 may not be justified if penalty had already been imposed under Section 78 : High Court

SECTION 76 provides for penalty for failure to pay the amount while Section 78 provides for penalty for suppressing the taxable value. Section 78 is, thus, more comprehensive and provides for higher amount. Even if technically, the scope of sections 76 and 78 is different, penalty under Section 76 may not be justified if penalty had already been imposed under Section 78; the appellate authority was within its jurisdiction not to levy penalty under section 76 of the Act having regard to the fact that penalty equal to service tax had already been imposed under section 78 of the Act

Income Tax

Whether when roof of factory premises is damaged in hailstorm, expenditure incurred on repair and labour charges resulting in enduring benefits to assessee can be claimed as revenue expenditure - Yes, rules ITAT

THE issue before the Tribunal is - Whether when the roof of the factory premises is damaged in hailstorm, the expenditure incurred on repair and labour charges resulting in enduring benefits to the assessee can be claimed as revenue expenditure. And the Tribunal's answer is YES.

Central Excise

Appellant receiving the goods from supplier and after carrying tests on the same found it to be in order as per the description shown in the invoice - CENVAT Credit rightly availed : CESTAT

AN allegation was made against the appellant that they have procured central excise duty paid invoices but have not received the goods mentioned in the invoice physically as the dealers who have supplied the goods have never received the goods auctioned by M/s Ispat Industries Ltd. but the same were diverted to units which were availing SSI exemption and did not require the duty paid invoices.

See our columns Tomorrow for the Judgements