<?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>2003 (7) TMI 1 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Kolkata upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to set aside penalties imposed on a foreign entity for failure to pay service tax, citing a reasonable cause under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The entity, an Association for Economic Affairs of the Ministry for Economic Affairs and Trade of the Russian Federation, had a contract with Rourkela Steel Plant (RSP) specifying RSP&#039;s responsibility for taxes in India. The Tribunal emphasized the entity&#039;s non-resident status, lack of intent to evade taxes, and compliance with contractual terms as justifying the absence of penalties, aligning with the principle of judicious penalty imposition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39572" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 1 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Kolkata upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to set aside penalties imposed on a foreign entity for failure to pay service tax, citing a reasonable cause under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The entity, an Association for Economic Affairs of the Ministry for Economic Affairs and Trade of the Russian Federation, had a contract with Rourkela Steel Plant (RSP) specifying RSP&#039;s responsibility for taxes in India. The Tribunal emphasized the entity&#039;s non-resident status, lack of intent to evade taxes, and compliance with contractual terms as justifying the absence of penalties, aligning with the principle of judicious penalty imposition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>