<?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 (8) TMI 192 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201407</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, finding the respondent guilty of evasion of service tax due to suppression. However, the penalty under Section 76 was dropped as it applies when there is no guilty mind. The appeal by the Revenue was rejected, affirming the decision of dropping the penalty under Section 76 while upholding the penalty under Section 78.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175019" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 192 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201407</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, finding the respondent guilty of evasion of service tax due to suppression. However, the penalty under Section 76 was dropped as it applies when there is no guilty mind. The appeal by the Revenue was rejected, affirming the decision of dropping the penalty under Section 76 while upholding the penalty under Section 78.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201407</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>