<?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>2015 (1) TMI 488 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255289</link>
    <description>Service tax demands for different periods turned on verification of the assessee&#039;s claims of excess deposit and Cenvat credit reversal, and on exclusion of study material value under Notification No. 12/2003-ST. Where the adjudication order contained no specific finding on these factual claims, the matters were remitted for fresh verification and re-adjudication. For the 2010-11 demand, the absence of a show-cause notice meant the assessee was not validly put to notice of the charge, so that demand was unsustainable and set aside. The matter was thus partly allowed, with one demand annulled and the balance sent back for lawful reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2015 12:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373819" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 488 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255289</link>
      <description>Service tax demands for different periods turned on verification of the assessee&#039;s claims of excess deposit and Cenvat credit reversal, and on exclusion of study material value under Notification No. 12/2003-ST. Where the adjudication order contained no specific finding on these factual claims, the matters were remitted for fresh verification and re-adjudication. For the 2010-11 demand, the absence of a show-cause notice meant the assessee was not validly put to notice of the charge, so that demand was unsustainable and set aside. The matter was thus partly allowed, with one demand annulled and the balance sent back for lawful reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>