<?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 (9) TMI 1300 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191871</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the decision confirming the demand of service tax and penalty under Section 78, granting waiver of the penalty. The appellant&#039;s inadvertent double availing of Cenvat credit, promptly rectified upon discovery with voluntary payment, fell under the immunity provision of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal held that no show cause notice should have been issued, settling the case upon payment of service tax and interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Apr 2017 10:10:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467094" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1300 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191871</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the decision confirming the demand of service tax and penalty under Section 78, granting waiver of the penalty. The appellant&#039;s inadvertent double availing of Cenvat credit, promptly rectified upon discovery with voluntary payment, fell under the immunity provision of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal held that no show cause notice should have been issued, settling the case upon payment of service tax and interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191871</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>