<?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 (3) TMI 40 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257104</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted immunity to the appellant under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the lack of malafide intention in discrepancies, setting aside the penalties. The service tax demand was confirmed along with interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 07:22:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=377732" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 40 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257104</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted immunity to the appellant under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the lack of malafide intention in discrepancies, setting aside the penalties. The service tax demand was confirmed along with interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257104</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>