<?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 (11) TMI 317 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334299</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for Service Tax liability and interest but set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appellant had paid the tax amount using CENVAT credit, as evidenced by ST-3 returns, justifying the decision under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, with the penalty revoked due to the appellant&#039;s legitimate use of CENVAT credit for tax payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447209" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 317 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334299</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for Service Tax liability and interest but set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appellant had paid the tax amount using CENVAT credit, as evidenced by ST-3 returns, justifying the decision under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, with the penalty revoked due to the appellant&#039;s legitimate use of CENVAT credit for tax payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334299</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>