<?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 (11) TMI 169 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218154</link>
    <description>The court highlighted a discrepancy in the order regarding appeals, leading to the issuance of a new order to rectify the error. The case involved the liability of service tax on construction activities, with the rejection of a refund claim. The original decision was set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh decision to ensure a comprehensive examination of the issues raised and a fair opportunity for all parties to present their arguments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=191527" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 169 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218154</link>
      <description>The court highlighted a discrepancy in the order regarding appeals, leading to the issuance of a new order to rectify the error. The case involved the liability of service tax on construction activities, with the rejection of a refund claim. The original decision was set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh decision to ensure a comprehensive examination of the issues raised and a fair opportunity for all parties to present their arguments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218154</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>