<?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 823 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=131031</link>
    <description>The Tribunal denied the application for waiver of pre-deposit of total Service tax and penalty under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The applicants&#039; claim of engaging in maintenance and repair services, thus not liable to tax, was rejected due to insufficient evidence. Their request for abatement under Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. was also dismissed for lack of proof of material sales during taxable services provision. The Tribunal directed the applicants to deposit an additional amount within a specified period to avoid pre-deposit, with recovery stayed pending appeals, emphasizing the need for clear evidence and compliance with directives.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:32:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165932" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 823 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=131031</link>
      <description>The Tribunal denied the application for waiver of pre-deposit of total Service tax and penalty under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The applicants&#039; claim of engaging in maintenance and repair services, thus not liable to tax, was rejected due to insufficient evidence. Their request for abatement under Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. was also dismissed for lack of proof of material sales during taxable services provision. The Tribunal directed the applicants to deposit an additional amount within a specified period to avoid pre-deposit, with recovery stayed pending appeals, emphasizing the need for clear evidence and compliance with directives.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=131031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>