<?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>2018 (1) TMI 377 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353641</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under section 78 of the Finance Act, citing the appellant&#039;s bona fide belief due to confusion in the field and subsequent circulars accepting court decisions. The Tribunal found no evidence of mala fide intent on the part of the assessee and allowed the appeal to that extent. The demand for tax and interest was upheld as uncontested by the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2018 08:16:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503653" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 377 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353641</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under section 78 of the Finance Act, citing the appellant&#039;s bona fide belief due to confusion in the field and subsequent circulars accepting court decisions. The Tribunal found no evidence of mala fide intent on the part of the assessee and allowed the appeal to that extent. The demand for tax and interest was upheld as uncontested by the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353641</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>