<?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 (7) TMI 848 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345736</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order confirming the demand of service tax by the revisionary authority as it was deemed unsustainable due to the pendency of the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal was allowed with any consequential relief, emphasizing that no order should be passed by the Commissioner on any issue if an appeal against that issue is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals) as per section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2017 08:14:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482789" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 848 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345736</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order confirming the demand of service tax by the revisionary authority as it was deemed unsustainable due to the pendency of the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal was allowed with any consequential relief, emphasizing that no order should be passed by the Commissioner on any issue if an appeal against that issue is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals) as per section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>