<?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 (5) TMI 1360 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360796</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed as the show cause notice demanding service tax, interest, and penalties was deemed time-barred. The Tribunal found that the notice did not invoke the extended period of limitation or allege suppression, fraud, or collusion by the appellant. As a result, the demands related to the extended period were considered unsustainable due to the limitation issue. The impugned order was set aside for lacking merits, and the appellant was granted consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2018 13:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=521323" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 1360 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360796</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed as the show cause notice demanding service tax, interest, and penalties was deemed time-barred. The Tribunal found that the notice did not invoke the extended period of limitation or allege suppression, fraud, or collusion by the appellant. As a result, the demands related to the extended period were considered unsustainable due to the limitation issue. The impugned order was set aside for lacking merits, and the appellant was granted consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>