<?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 (12) TMI 263 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240598</link>
    <description>Parking facility services at airports were treated as airport service under the Finance Act, 1994 because the assessee provided car and scooter parking under an agreement with the Airports Authority of India and received consideration during the disputed period. Non-payment of service tax and failure to disclose the activity to the Department were held to amount to suppression with intent to evade tax, so the extended period under section 73 was upheld. On penalty, once suppression was established, no reasonable cause for non-payment was found; penalty under section 78 was therefore attracted and waiver under section 80 was denied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338434" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 263 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240598</link>
      <description>Parking facility services at airports were treated as airport service under the Finance Act, 1994 because the assessee provided car and scooter parking under an agreement with the Airports Authority of India and received consideration during the disputed period. Non-payment of service tax and failure to disclose the activity to the Department were held to amount to suppression with intent to evade tax, so the extended period under section 73 was upheld. On penalty, once suppression was established, no reasonable cause for non-payment was found; penalty under section 78 was therefore attracted and waiver under section 80 was denied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240598</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>