<?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>2015 (11) TMI 1602 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188206</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the demand for service tax from July 2012 to March 2013 was unsustainable and should be deducted from the total confirmed demand. It also held that the demand for service tax from 2008-09 to June 2012 was not sustainable. Consequently, interest and penalties were dropped, and the service tax paid for the period from July 2012 to March 2013 was maintained as uncontested. The importance of verifying the correctness of the appellant&#039;s claim was highlighted in the decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:46:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448660" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 1602 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188206</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the demand for service tax from July 2012 to March 2013 was unsustainable and should be deducted from the total confirmed demand. It also held that the demand for service tax from 2008-09 to June 2012 was not sustainable. Consequently, interest and penalties were dropped, and the service tax paid for the period from July 2012 to March 2013 was maintained as uncontested. The importance of verifying the correctness of the appellant&#039;s claim was highlighted in the decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188206</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>