<?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 834 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253517</link>
    <description>Where penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act is imposed for the same suppression-related default, a separate penalty under Section 76 may not be justified. The appellate authority treated Section 78 as the more comprehensive provision and dropped the Section 76 penalty on the footing that further punishment for the same conduct was unnecessary. The order waiving the Section 76 penalty was upheld, with no infirmity found in dropping that additional penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2014 15:17:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=369487" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 834 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253517</link>
      <description>Where penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act is imposed for the same suppression-related default, a separate penalty under Section 76 may not be justified. The appellate authority treated Section 78 as the more comprehensive provision and dropped the Section 76 penalty on the footing that further punishment for the same conduct was unnecessary. The order waiving the Section 76 penalty was upheld, with no infirmity found in dropping that additional penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253517</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>