<?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 (12) TMI 315 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77224</link>
    <description>Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 were examined in a situation where the service tax and interest had already been paid before issuance of the show cause notice. The Tribunal treated the dispute as confined to penalty and followed an earlier identical decision holding that sufficient cause existed for the delay in payment. On that basis, Section 80 was applied and the penalties were held unsustainable. The assessee therefore succeeded on the penalty issue, and the penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115396" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 315 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77224</link>
      <description>Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 were examined in a situation where the service tax and interest had already been paid before issuance of the show cause notice. The Tribunal treated the dispute as confined to penalty and followed an earlier identical decision holding that sufficient cause existed for the delay in payment. On that basis, Section 80 was applied and the penalties were held unsustainable. The assessee therefore succeeded on the penalty issue, and the penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77224</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>