<?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 366 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77551</link>
    <description>The applicability of Notification No. 1/2006-S.T. and the assessee&#039;s eligibility to claim exemption on first clearances required examination on merits at final hearing, so the issue could not be conclusively decided in stay proceedings. The refund direction was therefore kept in abeyance pending disposal of the appeal, and the stay application was allowed in favour of Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115717" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 366 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77551</link>
      <description>The applicability of Notification No. 1/2006-S.T. and the assessee&#039;s eligibility to claim exemption on first clearances required examination on merits at final hearing, so the issue could not be conclusively decided in stay proceedings. The refund direction was therefore kept in abeyance pending disposal of the appeal, and the stay application was allowed in favour of Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77551</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>