<?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>2011 (2) TMI 450 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205869</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision to restrict the liability to the normal period for demand of Service tax under Business Auxiliary Services (BAS) and Authorized Service Station (ASS). The Tribunal ruled that the assessee was liable to pay interest for the delay in tax payment but found no merit in imposing penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 10:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179369" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 450 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205869</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision to restrict the liability to the normal period for demand of Service tax under Business Auxiliary Services (BAS) and Authorized Service Station (ASS). The Tribunal ruled that the assessee was liable to pay interest for the delay in tax payment but found no merit in imposing penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>