<?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 (7) TMI 1079 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250043</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the case involving the classification of taxable services provided by the assessee for distribution of liquor products, as discrepancies were found in the Commissioner&#039;s classification. Regarding penalties under the Finance Act, 1994, the Tribunal upheld penalties imposed by the Commissioner up to a certain date but rejected an appeal for enhanced penalties post that date. Disputes over service classification for different entities led to the Tribunal remanding the matter back to the Commissioner for a fresh order. The Tribunal criticized the incorrect application of section 65A for service classification and emphasized the need for a fair hearing and examination of evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2014 15:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=360982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 1079 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250043</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the case involving the classification of taxable services provided by the assessee for distribution of liquor products, as discrepancies were found in the Commissioner&#039;s classification. Regarding penalties under the Finance Act, 1994, the Tribunal upheld penalties imposed by the Commissioner up to a certain date but rejected an appeal for enhanced penalties post that date. Disputes over service classification for different entities led to the Tribunal remanding the matter back to the Commissioner for a fresh order. The Tribunal criticized the incorrect application of section 65A for service classification and emphasized the need for a fair hearing and examination of evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250043</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>