<?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>2008 (2) TMI 69 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4322</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposition under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, but remanded the case for redetermination of the penalty amount, emphasizing the need for the Commissioner to exercise discretion in choosing the penalty rate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43665" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 69 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4322</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposition under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, but remanded the case for redetermination of the penalty amount, emphasizing the need for the Commissioner to exercise discretion in choosing the penalty rate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>