<?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 1176 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241511</link>
    <description>A tax demand based on a worksheet used for quantification could not be sustained where the worksheet was not supplied to the assessee, because effective rebuttal requires disclosure of the material relied on for computation. The admitted amount of input credit on exempted services remained undisputed, but the balance demand was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after furnishing the worksheet and granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2013 06:59:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340690" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 1176 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241511</link>
      <description>A tax demand based on a worksheet used for quantification could not be sustained where the worksheet was not supplied to the assessee, because effective rebuttal requires disclosure of the material relied on for computation. The admitted amount of input credit on exempted services remained undisputed, but the balance demand was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after furnishing the worksheet and granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>