<?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 (10) TMI 218 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208357</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner not to impose penalties on the respondents under section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The confusion surrounding the taxability of projects for non-profit organizations during the relevant period, along with the respondents&#039; prompt actions in responding to investigations and paying service tax dues, were considered valid reasons for the non-imposition of penalties. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the Commissioner&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2012 12:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181825" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 218 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208357</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner not to impose penalties on the respondents under section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The confusion surrounding the taxability of projects for non-profit organizations during the relevant period, along with the respondents&#039; prompt actions in responding to investigations and paying service tax dues, were considered valid reasons for the non-imposition of penalties. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the Commissioner&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208357</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>