<?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 (4) TMI 386 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341416</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision to drop the demand based on the assessee&#039;s adjustment of excess service tax payments in compliance with Rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rules. The Tribunal relied on legal precedents and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, emphasizing the correctness of the Commissioner&#039;s decision and the applicability of established legal principles in allowing such adjustments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Apr 2017 07:33:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=465249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 386 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341416</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision to drop the demand based on the assessee&#039;s adjustment of excess service tax payments in compliance with Rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rules. The Tribunal relied on legal precedents and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, emphasizing the correctness of the Commissioner&#039;s decision and the applicability of established legal principles in allowing such adjustments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>