<?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 639 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330041</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the writ petition challenging service tax liability for 2009-2014, citing lack of natural justice in adjudication and disputing penalties. Despite an available appeal route, the Court found exceptions due to procedural violations. Emphasizing fair hearings, it set aside orders, directing reevaluation by the 2nd respondent with proper hearing and document submission opportunities within four months.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2016 11:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=435117" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 639 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330041</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the writ petition challenging service tax liability for 2009-2014, citing lack of natural justice in adjudication and disputing penalties. Despite an available appeal route, the Court found exceptions due to procedural violations. Emphasizing fair hearings, it set aside orders, directing reevaluation by the 2nd respondent with proper hearing and document submission opportunities within four months.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330041</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>