<?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 (7) TMI 92 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329494</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand related to passenger service fee and airport taxes, as well as the penalty under Section 78. The decision was based on the lack of evidence supporting wilful misstatement or suppression of facts by the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433653" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 92 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329494</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand related to passenger service fee and airport taxes, as well as the penalty under Section 78. The decision was based on the lack of evidence supporting wilful misstatement or suppression of facts by the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329494</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>