<?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 (6) TMI 1020 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344749</link>
    <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for credit on debit notes but affirming the demand for the unspecified service amount not appearing in the invoice and the cenvat credit on bus service charges. Penalties and interest were upheld for the upheld demands, emphasizing the importance of disclosing all relevant facts to avoid suppression of facts and time-barred claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 09:31:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=475450" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 1020 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344749</link>
      <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for credit on debit notes but affirming the demand for the unspecified service amount not appearing in the invoice and the cenvat credit on bus service charges. Penalties and interest were upheld for the upheld demands, emphasizing the importance of disclosing all relevant facts to avoid suppression of facts and time-barred claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344749</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>