<?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 (6) TMI 478 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361651</link>
    <description>The application for change of cause title due to jurisdiction and address change was allowed, altering the jurisdiction and address of the respondent. The appellant, an &#039;Air Travel Agent,&#039; faced a service tax liability on incentives received from software companies, leading to a demand for tax, interest, and penalties. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant on the limitation period issue, finding no malafide intent and barring the demand beyond the normal period. Penalties were deemed unjustified due to the absence of malafide intent and the ongoing litigation, resulting in a remand for re-quantification of the demand within the limitation period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2018 10:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=523182" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 478 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361651</link>
      <description>The application for change of cause title due to jurisdiction and address change was allowed, altering the jurisdiction and address of the respondent. The appellant, an &#039;Air Travel Agent,&#039; faced a service tax liability on incentives received from software companies, leading to a demand for tax, interest, and penalties. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant on the limitation period issue, finding no malafide intent and barring the demand beyond the normal period. Penalties were deemed unjustified due to the absence of malafide intent and the ongoing litigation, resulting in a remand for re-quantification of the demand within the limitation period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361651</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>