<?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 324 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240659</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE directed the appellant to pre-deposit a specified amount within a given period, with a waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for the remaining balance. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant&#039;s case against the denial of Cenvat credit on Employees Group Health Insurance Service, citing supporting case law. However, regarding the denial of Cenvat credit on Construction Service, the appellant had not established a prima facie case. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant on the invokability of the extended period of limitation, highlighting similarities between penalty provisions and the extended period. Compliance and reporting back were emphasized.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Dec 2013 06:29:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 324 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240659</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE directed the appellant to pre-deposit a specified amount within a given period, with a waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for the remaining balance. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant&#039;s case against the denial of Cenvat credit on Employees Group Health Insurance Service, citing supporting case law. However, regarding the denial of Cenvat credit on Construction Service, the appellant had not established a prima facie case. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant on the invokability of the extended period of limitation, highlighting similarities between penalty provisions and the extended period. Compliance and reporting back were emphasized.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240659</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>