<?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 1105 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332844</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order confirming a service tax demand beyond the time limit as the show cause notice did not explicitly allege suppression or misstatement, rendering the proceeding time-barred. The appeal was allowed solely on the ground of limitation, emphasizing the necessity of clearly stating such allegations in the notice to justify demands beyond the statutory period. This case underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and statutory provisions in tax-related proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=442955" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1105 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332844</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order confirming a service tax demand beyond the time limit as the show cause notice did not explicitly allege suppression or misstatement, rendering the proceeding time-barred. The appeal was allowed solely on the ground of limitation, emphasizing the necessity of clearly stating such allegations in the notice to justify demands beyond the statutory period. This case underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and statutory provisions in tax-related proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332844</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>