<?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 (12) TMI 1403 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270099</link>
    <description>A quasi-judicial order confirming service tax, interest and penalties must address the assessee&#039;s material objections on taxability, limitation, valuation and best judgment assessment; a non-speaking order that omits such consideration is unsustainable. Where the reasoning is summary or internally inconsistent, including on alleged royalty, extended limitation and quantification, the proper course is remand for fresh de novo adjudication after hearing the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 May 2016 11:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=410955" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 1403 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270099</link>
      <description>A quasi-judicial order confirming service tax, interest and penalties must address the assessee&#039;s material objections on taxability, limitation, valuation and best judgment assessment; a non-speaking order that omits such consideration is unsustainable. Where the reasoning is summary or internally inconsistent, including on alleged royalty, extended limitation and quantification, the proper course is remand for fresh de novo adjudication after hearing the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270099</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>