<?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 (5) TMI 820 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130036</link>
    <description>Complete waiver of pre-deposit was granted in a service tax dispute involving business auxiliary services, where the appellant prosecuted the appeal as the successor and legal heir of the deceased service provider. The Tribunal noted the appellant&#039;s plea of severe financial hardship, inconsistent departmental positions on the characterisation of the activity, and defects in the show cause notice, including failure to identify the specific clause under the relevant explanation for the disputed service sub-category. The Tribunal also referred to earlier decisions treating comparable activities differently and noted that the issue was pending in higher forums, leading it to relieve the appellant from the pre-deposit requirement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:05:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165928" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 820 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130036</link>
      <description>Complete waiver of pre-deposit was granted in a service tax dispute involving business auxiliary services, where the appellant prosecuted the appeal as the successor and legal heir of the deceased service provider. The Tribunal noted the appellant&#039;s plea of severe financial hardship, inconsistent departmental positions on the characterisation of the activity, and defects in the show cause notice, including failure to identify the specific clause under the relevant explanation for the disputed service sub-category. The Tribunal also referred to earlier decisions treating comparable activities differently and noted that the issue was pending in higher forums, leading it to relieve the appellant from the pre-deposit requirement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130036</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>