<?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 (6) TMI 341 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201582</link>
    <description>The appeal was partly allowed in a case challenging a service tax demand on activities related to processing Jeans Buttons and Needle Threader. The Tribunal ruled that the duty liability for service tax should only apply from 16-6-2005, penalties were annulled based on the benefit granted under Section 80, and the service tax demand was directed to be recalculated post that specific date. An additional ground asserting no demand could be sustained pre-16-6-2005 was accepted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 15:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175188" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 341 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201582</link>
      <description>The appeal was partly allowed in a case challenging a service tax demand on activities related to processing Jeans Buttons and Needle Threader. The Tribunal ruled that the duty liability for service tax should only apply from 16-6-2005, penalties were annulled based on the benefit granted under Section 80, and the service tax demand was directed to be recalculated post that specific date. An additional ground asserting no demand could be sustained pre-16-6-2005 was accepted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201582</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>