<?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>2017 (3) TMI 613 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340110</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision to set aside the penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the lack of evidence of intent to evade service tax payment and the invocation of the waiver of penalty under Section 80. The department&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:16:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=461221" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 613 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340110</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision to set aside the penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the lack of evidence of intent to evade service tax payment and the invocation of the waiver of penalty under Section 80. The department&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340110</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>