<?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 1286 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198242</link>
    <description>Belated compliance with the conditions in Notification No. 18/2009-ST was treated as procedural and regulatory rather than mandatory, so delay in filing the prescribed information and return did not by itself justify denial of the exemption benefit. The exemption was therefore held to remain available despite the late fulfilment of conditions, and the matter was decided in favour of the assessee without further examination of the limitation plea.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506168" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 1286 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198242</link>
      <description>Belated compliance with the conditions in Notification No. 18/2009-ST was treated as procedural and regulatory rather than mandatory, so delay in filing the prescribed information and return did not by itself justify denial of the exemption benefit. The exemption was therefore held to remain available despite the late fulfilment of conditions, and the matter was decided in favour of the assessee without further examination of the limitation plea.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198242</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>