<?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>2015 (9) TMI 684 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264016</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty of Rs. 10,000 under Section 77 but set aside the late fee imposed under Rule 7C of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, as the appellant had already paid the penalty amount, resulting in no further liability for penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2015 07:18:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397254" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 684 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264016</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty of Rs. 10,000 under Section 77 but set aside the late fee imposed under Rule 7C of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, as the appellant had already paid the penalty amount, resulting in no further liability for penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264016</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>