<?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 (10) TMI 228 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264953</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the decision to drop the penalty under Section 78 while upholding the tax liability and penalties under Sections 76 and 77. The Tribunal found that the respondent&#039;s voluntary disclosure of tax liability, partial payment of tax, and compliance with statutory requirements justified setting aside the penalty under Section 78, in accordance with Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399837" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 228 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264953</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the decision to drop the penalty under Section 78 while upholding the tax liability and penalties under Sections 76 and 77. The Tribunal found that the respondent&#039;s voluntary disclosure of tax liability, partial payment of tax, and compliance with statutory requirements justified setting aside the penalty under Section 78, in accordance with Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264953</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>