<?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 (6) TMI 120 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213800</link>
    <description>Where the Commissioner (Appeals) had not decided the matter on merits, CESTAT waived the balance pre-deposit, directed a reduced deposit, and remanded the appeal for fresh adjudication after granting an opportunity of hearing. The operative effect was that further insistence on dues was dispensed with for the remand proceedings, while the appeal was restored to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 14:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187200" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 120 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213800</link>
      <description>Where the Commissioner (Appeals) had not decided the matter on merits, CESTAT waived the balance pre-deposit, directed a reduced deposit, and remanded the appeal for fresh adjudication after granting an opportunity of hearing. The operative effect was that further insistence on dues was dispensed with for the remand proceedings, while the appeal was restored to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213800</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>