<?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 (3) TMI 551 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356848</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the change of cause title from Commissioner of Service Tax to Commissioner of GST &amp;amp; Central Excise. It considered the applicability of the retrospective exemption under Section 104 of the Finance Act, 1994, and remanded the matter for reconsideration by the adjudicating authority. The decision was based on the arguments presented by the appellants regarding their service tax liability and the retrospective exemption provided by the Finance Bill 2017.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 06:49:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512498" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 551 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356848</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the change of cause title from Commissioner of Service Tax to Commissioner of GST &amp;amp; Central Excise. It considered the applicability of the retrospective exemption under Section 104 of the Finance Act, 1994, and remanded the matter for reconsideration by the adjudicating authority. The decision was based on the arguments presented by the appellants regarding their service tax liability and the retrospective exemption provided by the Finance Bill 2017.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>