Held - We are of the view that when the question of interpretation of law caused confusion to both sides, such a case could not be held to be a case of intention to evade tax liability, therefore no penalty would also be leviable in the instant case. Thus for re-determination of the tax liability for the normal period and for non-imposition of penalty for that period, the matter was to be sent back to the adjudicating authority to re-determine.....

Held -It was submitted that there is no question of any misdeclaration or suppression with intent to evade service tax by the appellant. Service tax was introduced on 16-7-2002. They entertained bona fide belief that the activities undertaken by them are not covered under the purview of service tax during the relevant period. It was submitted that the show cause notice having been issued on 18-10-2006 relating to the period of 21-8- 2002 to 2-.....

Held - In this case it has been stressed that the appellant is not rendering services exclusively for the finance companies. Their main object is to promote their own business. Is it a case, where the appellant is rendering services to the finance companies. Is it a case, the finance company is rendering services to the appellant. Or is it a case, the appellant is rendering services to the buyer of the vehicles. In any way the appellant is bas.....