<?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 425 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213588</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the levy of service tax on Mandap Keeper services due to the appellant&#039;s failure to provide evidence. However, considering the appellant&#039;s charitable intentions and limited understanding of tax laws, the penalty imposed was annulled under section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was partially allowed, providing relief to the appellant while acknowledging the distinct purposes of Mandap Keeper Services and film shooting premises.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2012 18:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186989" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 425 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213588</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the levy of service tax on Mandap Keeper services due to the appellant&#039;s failure to provide evidence. However, considering the appellant&#039;s charitable intentions and limited understanding of tax laws, the penalty imposed was annulled under section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was partially allowed, providing relief to the appellant while acknowledging the distinct purposes of Mandap Keeper Services and film shooting premises.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213588</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>