<?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 (4) TMI 1466 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359355</link>
    <description>Abatement under Notification No. 01/2006-ST was available only where Cenvat credit was not used for payment of service tax. Although the assessee initially used such credit, it reversed the entire credit with interest before issuance of the show cause notice. That later reversal was treated as curing the defect for the purpose of the notification, so the assessee remained entitled to the abatement and the denial of the benefit could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2019 11:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518332" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1466 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359355</link>
      <description>Abatement under Notification No. 01/2006-ST was available only where Cenvat credit was not used for payment of service tax. Although the assessee initially used such credit, it reversed the entire credit with interest before issuance of the show cause notice. That later reversal was treated as curing the defect for the purpose of the notification, so the assessee remained entitled to the abatement and the denial of the benefit could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>