<?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 (5) TMI 175 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259301</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the first appellate authority to set aside the penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant paid the service tax only after being notified by the department, leading to the penalty being waived. The Tribunal found that the first appellate authority&#039;s exercise of discretionary powers under Section 80 was reasonable, ultimately rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 May 2015 07:46:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383918" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 175 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259301</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the first appellate authority to set aside the penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant paid the service tax only after being notified by the department, leading to the penalty being waived. The Tribunal found that the first appellate authority&#039;s exercise of discretionary powers under Section 80 was reasonable, ultimately rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259301</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>