<?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 (2) TMI 145 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354724</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, finding it unjustified as the appellants had paid the entire tax liability before the show cause notice was issued. The Tribunal upheld the demand for service tax and interest, allowing the appeal with consequential benefits as per the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Feb 2018 08:32:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=507436" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 145 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354724</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, finding it unjustified as the appellants had paid the entire tax liability before the show cause notice was issued. The Tribunal upheld the demand for service tax and interest, allowing the appeal with consequential benefits as per the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354724</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>