<?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 (9) TMI 362 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202463</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the cases for a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority after recognizing a violation of natural justice, despite finding that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not possess the power of remand under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the applicability of provisions from the Central Excise Act to Service tax matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176044" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 362 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202463</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the cases for a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority after recognizing a violation of natural justice, despite finding that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not possess the power of remand under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the applicability of provisions from the Central Excise Act to Service tax matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202463</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>