<?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>2010 (6) TMI 147 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77293</link>
    <description>Where the service tax shortfall was paid before issuance of the show cause notice, Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 applied and relieved the assessee from further litigation on that demand. On that footing, the foundation for penal proceedings did not survive, because the shortfall had already been made good before notice. Penalty under Section 76 was therefore held to be not sustainable, and the appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 147 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77293</link>
      <description>Where the service tax shortfall was paid before issuance of the show cause notice, Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 applied and relieved the assessee from further litigation on that demand. On that footing, the foundation for penal proceedings did not survive, because the shortfall had already been made good before notice. Penalty under Section 76 was therefore held to be not sustainable, and the appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77293</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>