<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (2) TMI 375 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76206</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed due to the appellants&#039; failure to comply with the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; directions. The appellants had made excess payments of service tax, which were adjusted against future liabilities. The authority found that tribunal decisions cited lacked precedential value. The matter was remanded for a fresh decision without requiring pre-deposit of dues, allowing the appeal by way of remand and disposing of the stay application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114426" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 375 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76206</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed due to the appellants&#039; failure to comply with the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; directions. The appellants had made excess payments of service tax, which were adjusted against future liabilities. The authority found that tribunal decisions cited lacked precedential value. The matter was remanded for a fresh decision without requiring pre-deposit of dues, allowing the appeal by way of remand and disposing of the stay application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76206</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>