<?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 1144 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242929</link>
    <description>Waiver of pre-deposit was granted where the appellant showed a prima facie case that its activity was providing buses for employee transport, while the Revenue alleged rent-a-cab service without documentary evidence that cabs or taxis were hired out. The Tribunal treated the Revenue&#039;s prior awareness of the activity and the gap between such awareness and the show cause notice as raising a serious limitation issue. It also relied on the appellant&#039;s prior deposit of the tax attributable to the in-limitation period, together with interest, as sufficient compliance for pre-deposit purposes. The balance service tax and the entire penalty were waived, and recovery was stayed during the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jan 2014 07:00:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=343460" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 1144 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242929</link>
      <description>Waiver of pre-deposit was granted where the appellant showed a prima facie case that its activity was providing buses for employee transport, while the Revenue alleged rent-a-cab service without documentary evidence that cabs or taxis were hired out. The Tribunal treated the Revenue&#039;s prior awareness of the activity and the gap between such awareness and the show cause notice as raising a serious limitation issue. It also relied on the appellant&#039;s prior deposit of the tax attributable to the in-limitation period, together with interest, as sufficient compliance for pre-deposit purposes. The balance service tax and the entire penalty were waived, and recovery was stayed during the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242929</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>