<?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>2009 (3) TMI 885 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128894</link>
    <description>The Tribunal directed the applicants to deposit Rs. 1,00,000 towards service tax within eight weeks, with the balance amount and penalties to be waived upon compliance. Non-compliance would result in the vacation of stay and dismissal of the appeal without notice. The definition of outdoor catering during the disputed period did not align with the services provided, leading to the waiver decision based on lack of suppression or misstatement for tax evasion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2013 10:10:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165763" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 885 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128894</link>
      <description>The Tribunal directed the applicants to deposit Rs. 1,00,000 towards service tax within eight weeks, with the balance amount and penalties to be waived upon compliance. Non-compliance would result in the vacation of stay and dismissal of the appeal without notice. The definition of outdoor catering during the disputed period did not align with the services provided, leading to the waiver decision based on lack of suppression or misstatement for tax evasion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128894</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>