<?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 1108 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335090</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Service Tax liability and interest but set aside the penalties imposed on the appellant based on their bonafide belief regarding the taxability of the services provided. The decision emphasized the importance of specific reporting and declarations made by the appellant in determining a bonafide belief, ultimately invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, to relieve the appellant of the penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2016 16:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=449216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1108 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335090</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Service Tax liability and interest but set aside the penalties imposed on the appellant based on their bonafide belief regarding the taxability of the services provided. The decision emphasized the importance of specific reporting and declarations made by the appellant in determining a bonafide belief, ultimately invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, to relieve the appellant of the penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>