<?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 (3) TMI 7 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267</link>
    <description>Acceptance of a service tax payer&#039;s plea of prior payment without verifying proof of deposit was unsustainable. The appellate authority had set aside tax, penalty and interest while also stating that the Assistant Commissioner would verify the matter and treating the tax as deemed paid, but the record did not establish actual payment. The order-in-appeal was therefore set aside and the matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision after hearing the respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 May 2011 14:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39731" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 7 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267</link>
      <description>Acceptance of a service tax payer&#039;s plea of prior payment without verifying proof of deposit was unsustainable. The appellate authority had set aside tax, penalty and interest while also stating that the Assistant Commissioner would verify the matter and treating the tax as deemed paid, but the record did not establish actual payment. The order-in-appeal was therefore set aside and the matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision after hearing the respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>