<?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>2005 (3) TMI 7 - CESTAT (CHENNAI)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT (CHENNAI) set aside the duty demand from the appellants for a specific period. The Commissioner (Appeals) did not grant a refund despite relying on a previous Tribunal decision, stating that the service tax liability was not extinguished. The appellants, represented by Shri S. Renganathan, were not refunded by the Commissioner (Appeals) after the duty demand was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39714" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 7 - CESTAT (CHENNAI)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT (CHENNAI) set aside the duty demand from the appellants for a specific period. The Commissioner (Appeals) did not grant a refund despite relying on a previous Tribunal decision, stating that the service tax liability was not extinguished. The appellants, represented by Shri S. Renganathan, were not refunded by the Commissioner (Appeals) after the duty demand was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>