<?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 (7) TMI 315 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201548</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of penalties for late filing of returns and delay in payment of service tax, reducing the penalty amount from 36,000 to 10,000 and from 18,000 to 9,000 under Section 76. The penalty of 1,000 under Section 77 was upheld, with the appeal allowed to the extent of the penalty reduction. The Tribunal found the penalty sustainable despite the appellant&#039;s arguments, citing the undisputed delay in payment and filing of returns.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2014 15:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175156" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 315 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201548</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of penalties for late filing of returns and delay in payment of service tax, reducing the penalty amount from 36,000 to 10,000 and from 18,000 to 9,000 under Section 76. The penalty of 1,000 under Section 77 was upheld, with the appeal allowed to the extent of the penalty reduction. The Tribunal found the penalty sustainable despite the appellant&#039;s arguments, citing the undisputed delay in payment and filing of returns.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>