<?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 (9) TMI 1104 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332843</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal against a service tax demand and penalties under Sections 76 and 77, based on the classification of services. The appellant&#039;s services were deemed to fall under Commercial or Industrial Construction, not Erection, Commissioning, and Installation as asserted by the Department. The Tribunal granted a stay on recovery pending appeal disposal, citing the appellant&#039;s registration and the nature of work performed for Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. The issue of time limitation for proceedings initiated by the Department was not extensively addressed in the judgment summary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 15:48:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=442954" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1104 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332843</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal against a service tax demand and penalties under Sections 76 and 77, based on the classification of services. The appellant&#039;s services were deemed to fall under Commercial or Industrial Construction, not Erection, Commissioning, and Installation as asserted by the Department. The Tribunal granted a stay on recovery pending appeal disposal, citing the appellant&#039;s registration and the nature of work performed for Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. The issue of time limitation for proceedings initiated by the Department was not extensively addressed in the judgment summary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332843</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>