<?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 (12) TMI 597 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335952</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal found that the crucial issue of whether the roads and park were part of a residential complex required further examination in accordance with legal precedents, setting aside the impugned order and directing the appellant to appear before the adjudicating authority for a hearing within 45 days.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2017 12:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=451361" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 597 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335952</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal found that the crucial issue of whether the roads and park were part of a residential complex required further examination in accordance with legal precedents, setting aside the impugned order and directing the appellant to appear before the adjudicating authority for a hearing within 45 days.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335952</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>