<?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 317 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201570</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. It held that no show cause notice should have been issued once the service tax with interest was paid, citing Section 73(3) of the Act and relevant precedents. The Tribunal considered the appellant&#039;s circumstances and granted leniency under Section 80 of the Act, emphasizing compliance with tax obligations and procedural fairness in tax enforcement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:20:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175178" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 317 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201570</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. It held that no show cause notice should have been issued once the service tax with interest was paid, citing Section 73(3) of the Act and relevant precedents. The Tribunal considered the appellant&#039;s circumstances and granted leniency under Section 80 of the Act, emphasizing compliance with tax obligations and procedural fairness in tax enforcement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201570</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>