<?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>2016 (5) TMI 1079 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328098</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order on grounds of limitation and penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act. The decision stressed the necessity of substantial evidence for allegations of willful suppression and considered the appellant&#039;s circumstances, including compassionate grounds, in reaching a just outcome.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 May 2016 08:17:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429602" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1079 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328098</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order on grounds of limitation and penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act. The decision stressed the necessity of substantial evidence for allegations of willful suppression and considered the appellant&#039;s circumstances, including compassionate grounds, in reaching a just outcome.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328098</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>