<?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>2006 (11) TMI 16 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=988</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the demands for Service Tax were time-barred as the Department failed to invoke the proviso of the amended Section 73 in the Order-in-Original. The Tribunal emphasized that the new provisions should have been applied at the time of issuing the notice, leading to the demands being considered invalid. Additionally, confirming demands under a different category than alleged in the show cause notice was deemed improper, resulting in the order being set aside, and the appeal allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2014 18:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40414" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 16 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=988</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the demands for Service Tax were time-barred as the Department failed to invoke the proviso of the amended Section 73 in the Order-in-Original. The Tribunal emphasized that the new provisions should have been applied at the time of issuing the notice, leading to the demands being considered invalid. Additionally, confirming demands under a different category than alleged in the show cause notice was deemed improper, resulting in the order being set aside, and the appeal allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=988</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>