<?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>2014 (11) TMI 989 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171151</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the previous order imposing penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, and remanded the matter to the CESTAT for fresh adjudication. The Court held that simultaneous penalties cannot be imposed under the Act and noted errors in the Tribunal&#039;s findings regarding penalty deposit requirements. The appellant was directed to appear before the CESTAT for a decision within three months.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2015 18:07:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=389918" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 989 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171151</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the previous order imposing penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, and remanded the matter to the CESTAT for fresh adjudication. The Court held that simultaneous penalties cannot be imposed under the Act and noted errors in the Tribunal&#039;s findings regarding penalty deposit requirements. The appellant was directed to appear before the CESTAT for a decision within three months.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171151</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>