<?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 (10) TMI 637 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217699</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision on service tax demand and penalty, rejecting the appeals by the appellant company and the department. The appellant failed to declare correct service charges, leading to an inflated demand, which the Tribunal deemed justified. The department&#039;s challenge against the reduction of service tax demand was dismissed due to lack of evidence of improper verification. Additionally, the Tribunal denied the appellant&#039;s claim for additional cenvat credit, citing unsubstantiated evidence and discrepancies in reporting service charges. The cross-objection was also dismissed as withdrawn.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2012 14:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=191074" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 637 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217699</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision on service tax demand and penalty, rejecting the appeals by the appellant company and the department. The appellant failed to declare correct service charges, leading to an inflated demand, which the Tribunal deemed justified. The department&#039;s challenge against the reduction of service tax demand was dismissed due to lack of evidence of improper verification. Additionally, the Tribunal denied the appellant&#039;s claim for additional cenvat credit, citing unsubstantiated evidence and discrepancies in reporting service charges. The cross-objection was also dismissed as withdrawn.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217699</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>