<?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 (4) TMI 780 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258899</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Order-in-Appeal setting aside the penalty under Section 76 while confirming penalties under Sections 77 and 78 for service tax demand related to packaging services. It determined that penalties under Sections 76 and 78 were not mutually exclusive during the relevant period but became so from 16.05.2008 due to an amendment. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal held that imposing a penalty under Section 78 could impact the decision on imposing a penalty under Section 76. Consequently, the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, and the Respondents&#039; cross-objections were deemed infructuous.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2015 11:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=382683" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 780 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258899</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Order-in-Appeal setting aside the penalty under Section 76 while confirming penalties under Sections 77 and 78 for service tax demand related to packaging services. It determined that penalties under Sections 76 and 78 were not mutually exclusive during the relevant period but became so from 16.05.2008 due to an amendment. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal held that imposing a penalty under Section 78 could impact the decision on imposing a penalty under Section 76. Consequently, the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, and the Respondents&#039; cross-objections were deemed infructuous.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258899</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>