<?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>2013 (11) TMI 1407 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240230</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal to the extent of setting aside penalties imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. However, it affirmed the statutory limits and notification requirements for adjusting excess Service Tax payments under Rule 6(4A) and (4B) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, restricting the adjustment to Rs.1 lakh and emphasizing the need for precise compliance with the rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337395" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 1407 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240230</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal to the extent of setting aside penalties imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. However, it affirmed the statutory limits and notification requirements for adjusting excess Service Tax payments under Rule 6(4A) and (4B) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, restricting the adjustment to Rs.1 lakh and emphasizing the need for precise compliance with the rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240230</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>