<?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>2004 (6) TMI 8 - CESTAT (NEW DELHI)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183</link>
    <description>The Tribunal affirmed the demand for service tax and interest in the final order, while setting aside the penalty. The petitioners&#039; argument for exemption from interest based on a retrospective amendment to the Finance Act was rejected. The Tribunal held that their liability for the period in question was established under the law at that time, unaffected by subsequent amendments. The applications seeking rectification were dismissed, upholding the petitioners&#039; liability for interest on the service tax payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39647" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 8 - CESTAT (NEW DELHI)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183</link>
      <description>The Tribunal affirmed the demand for service tax and interest in the final order, while setting aside the penalty. The petitioners&#039; argument for exemption from interest based on a retrospective amendment to the Finance Act was rejected. The Tribunal held that their liability for the period in question was established under the law at that time, unaffected by subsequent amendments. The applications seeking rectification were dismissed, upholding the petitioners&#039; liability for interest on the service tax payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>