<?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>2014 (1) TMI 826 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242609</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by setting aside the penalty under section 76 but confirming the penalty under section 77. The judgment emphasized the importance of timely tax payment and the absence of suppression or misstatement in determining the applicability of penalties under the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:40:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=343003" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 826 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242609</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by setting aside the penalty under section 76 but confirming the penalty under section 77. The judgment emphasized the importance of timely tax payment and the absence of suppression or misstatement in determining the applicability of penalties under the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242609</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>