<?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>1999 (11) TMI 1 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27</link>
    <description>Penalty for delayed filing of service tax returns by clearing and forwarding agents under Section 77 was found excessive in light of an earlier Tribunal order involving similarly placed assessees. The Tribunal relied on the early stage of service tax implementation and the fact that the clients had discharged the tax liability as relevant relief factors. Following the same reasoning for identical delay and explanation, it reduced the penalty and limited interference to that extent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39503" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (11) TMI 1 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27</link>
      <description>Penalty for delayed filing of service tax returns by clearing and forwarding agents under Section 77 was found excessive in light of an earlier Tribunal order involving similarly placed assessees. The Tribunal relied on the early stage of service tax implementation and the fact that the clients had discharged the tax liability as relevant relief factors. Following the same reasoning for identical delay and explanation, it reduced the penalty and limited interference to that extent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>