<?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 (11) TMI 714 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253397</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, ruling that the respondents were not liable for a penalty under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The respondents rectified the deficiency promptly upon notification by the Revenue during the initial period of service tax imposition on their services. The Tribunal held that no penalty should be imposed as there was a reasonable cause for the failure, as per Section 80. Cross objections were also disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2014 12:35:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=369248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 714 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253397</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, ruling that the respondents were not liable for a penalty under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The respondents rectified the deficiency promptly upon notification by the Revenue during the initial period of service tax imposition on their services. The Tribunal held that no penalty should be imposed as there was a reasonable cause for the failure, as per Section 80. Cross objections were also disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>