<?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 128 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329530</link>
    <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, upholding the demand for service tax and interest but setting aside the penalties imposed under Sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act. The appellant&#039;s belief that the main contractor would handle the service tax liability was considered, leading to the waiver of penalties. The tribunal acknowledged the appellant&#039;s registration under Works Contract Service and invoked Section 80 of the Finance Act to waive the penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2016 16:56:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433778" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 128 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329530</link>
      <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, upholding the demand for service tax and interest but setting aside the penalties imposed under Sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act. The appellant&#039;s belief that the main contractor would handle the service tax liability was considered, leading to the waiver of penalties. The tribunal acknowledged the appellant&#039;s registration under Works Contract Service and invoked Section 80 of the Finance Act to waive the penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>