<?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 (7) TMI 121 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77419</link>
    <description>Penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was held unsustainable where the service tax demand had been admitted and paid, the amount was available as credit, and no intention to evade tax was established. Mere non-filing of returns, without further material showing suppression or wilful default, was treated as insufficient to attract the penal provision. The penalty was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115587" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 121 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77419</link>
      <description>Penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was held unsustainable where the service tax demand had been admitted and paid, the amount was available as credit, and no intention to evade tax was established. Mere non-filing of returns, without further material showing suppression or wilful default, was treated as insufficient to attract the penal provision. The penalty was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77419</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>