<?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 (3) TMI 506 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78232</link>
    <description>Service tax demand for 1997-98, based on amendments in the Finance Act, 2003 and confirmed by reference to the Finance Act, 2004, was required to be re-examined because the appellant&#039;s pleas on limitation and its status as an SSI unit not liable as a service receiver had not been properly considered. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision after granting the appellant an opportunity of hearing, with no opinion expressed on the merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2010 12:44:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116359" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 506 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78232</link>
      <description>Service tax demand for 1997-98, based on amendments in the Finance Act, 2003 and confirmed by reference to the Finance Act, 2004, was required to be re-examined because the appellant&#039;s pleas on limitation and its status as an SSI unit not liable as a service receiver had not been properly considered. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision after granting the appellant an opportunity of hearing, with no opinion expressed on the merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>