<?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 947 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255748</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to waive only 50% of the pre-deposit amount in an appeal against the Commissioner&#039;s order. The appellant&#039;s failure to prove financial hardship led to the requirement of a bank guarantee and deposit of the remaining 50%. The Court dismissed the appeal as it found no legal basis for consideration. Regarding the issue of Service Tax levy pending before the Supreme Court, the High Court emphasized compliance with existing law until the Supreme Court&#039;s ruling. The appeal was dismissed, but the compliance time was extended, with the Court clarifying that prior findings would not bind the final hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2015 18:09:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=374608" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 947 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255748</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to waive only 50% of the pre-deposit amount in an appeal against the Commissioner&#039;s order. The appellant&#039;s failure to prove financial hardship led to the requirement of a bank guarantee and deposit of the remaining 50%. The Court dismissed the appeal as it found no legal basis for consideration. Regarding the issue of Service Tax levy pending before the Supreme Court, the High Court emphasized compliance with existing law until the Supreme Court&#039;s ruling. The appeal was dismissed, but the compliance time was extended, with the Court clarifying that prior findings would not bind the final hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255748</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>