<?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 (6) TMI 74 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328365</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed to the extent that the penalty under Section 76 was set aside. The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, following the law laid down by the Delhi High Court and a subsequent Supreme Court decision, making the penalty under Section 76 inapplicable due to conflicting judicial pronouncements and the subsequent Supreme Court ruling.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2018 12:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430339" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 74 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328365</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed to the extent that the penalty under Section 76 was set aside. The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, following the law laid down by the Delhi High Court and a subsequent Supreme Court decision, making the penalty under Section 76 inapplicable due to conflicting judicial pronouncements and the subsequent Supreme Court ruling.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>