<?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>2012 (5) TMI 347 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213493</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order confirming the demand against the respondents but granted them the benefit of exemption Notification No. 12/03 for food items sold. Penalties under Sections 76 and 77 were waived due to the Appellants&#039; efforts to seek clarification and the absence of suppression of facts. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of proving suppression for penalties under Section 78, which was not established. The Commissioner (Appeals) decision to waive penalties under Section 80 was supported by the Appellants&#039; unanswered queries to the Revenue. The Tribunal also considered past decisions exempting food items from Service Tax, leading to the rejection of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 20:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 347 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213493</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order confirming the demand against the respondents but granted them the benefit of exemption Notification No. 12/03 for food items sold. Penalties under Sections 76 and 77 were waived due to the Appellants&#039; efforts to seek clarification and the absence of suppression of facts. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of proving suppression for penalties under Section 78, which was not established. The Commissioner (Appeals) decision to waive penalties under Section 80 was supported by the Appellants&#039; unanswered queries to the Revenue. The Tribunal also considered past decisions exempting food items from Service Tax, leading to the rejection of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213493</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>