<?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 (2) TMI 1 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115</link>
    <description>Penalty for delayed filing of a quarterly service tax return was held unwarranted where the assessee was new, the return was nil, and no business activity was being carried on. The Tribunal noted that service tax was a newly introduced levy and that the assessee was not conversant with the filing requirements. On the totality of the facts, the circumstances did not justify penal action under the provision invoked, and the penalty order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39579" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 1 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115</link>
      <description>Penalty for delayed filing of a quarterly service tax return was held unwarranted where the assessee was new, the return was nil, and no business activity was being carried on. The Tribunal noted that service tax was a newly introduced levy and that the assessee was not conversant with the filing requirements. On the totality of the facts, the circumstances did not justify penal action under the provision invoked, and the penalty order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>