<?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 (2) TMI 324 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77321</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for Service Tax and interest due to acknowledged liability, but set aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Act. The reduction in penalty to Rs. 25,000/- by the Commissioner (Appeals) was considered substantial under Section 80 of the Finance Act. Given the financial difficulties faced by the appellants, the Tribunal granted full benefit under this provision, thereby allowing the appeal and eliminating the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2010 18:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 324 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77321</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for Service Tax and interest due to acknowledged liability, but set aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Act. The reduction in penalty to Rs. 25,000/- by the Commissioner (Appeals) was considered substantial under Section 80 of the Finance Act. Given the financial difficulties faced by the appellants, the Tribunal granted full benefit under this provision, thereby allowing the appeal and eliminating the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77321</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>