<?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>1997 (8) TMI 1 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4</link>
    <description>Delayed filing of quarterly ST-3 returns was treated as a procedural lapse where the assessee had not carried on business during the relevant period and the return would have shown nil turnover. The Tribunal noted that the statutory filing requirement remained, but on these facts the late filing caused no substantive prejudice and followed an earlier decision on similar circumstances. Penalty for the delay was waived, and relief was granted to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (8) TMI 1 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4</link>
      <description>Delayed filing of quarterly ST-3 returns was treated as a procedural lapse where the assessee had not carried on business during the relevant period and the return would have shown nil turnover. The Tribunal noted that the statutory filing requirement remained, but on these facts the late filing caused no substantive prejudice and followed an earlier decision on similar circumstances. Penalty for the delay was waived, and relief was granted to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>