<?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>High Court Rules Against CESTAT&#039;s Extension for Reduced Penalty Payment u/s 78(1) of Finance Act, 1994.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=26315</link>
    <description>Extension of time for making reduced penalty - CESTAT could not have permitted the Respondent to pay the reduced penalty amount in terms of the second proviso to Section 78 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994 within thirty days from the date of the impugned order of the CESTAT. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 11:29:27 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 11:29:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408218" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>High Court Rules Against CESTAT&#039;s Extension for Reduced Penalty Payment u/s 78(1) of Finance Act, 1994.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=26315</link>
      <description>Extension of time for making reduced penalty - CESTAT could not have permitted the Respondent to pay the reduced penalty amount in terms of the second proviso to Section 78 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994 within thirty days from the date of the impugned order of the CESTAT. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 11:29:27 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=26315</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>