<?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>2007 (7) TMI 190 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4341</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for duty and interest, rejecting the appellant company&#039;s claim that their activities were part of the manufacturing process. The penalty under Section 78 was reduced, while penalties under other sections were upheld. Penalties on the General Manager (Finance) and Company Secretary were set aside due to the lack of specific evidence of their involvement in the evasion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43684" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 190 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4341</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for duty and interest, rejecting the appellant company&#039;s claim that their activities were part of the manufacturing process. The penalty under Section 78 was reduced, while penalties under other sections were upheld. Penalties on the General Manager (Finance) and Company Secretary were set aside due to the lack of specific evidence of their involvement in the evasion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4341</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>