<?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 (8) TMI 1102 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365630</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decisions on the denial of Cenvat Credit due to unregistered service providers and incorrect address on invoices. The matter of credit adjustment under Rule 6(3) was remanded for further verification, and the demand for short payment of Service Tax was set aside. The penalty imposed under Section 76 was not addressed in the judgment, indicating it was not upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:00:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=531466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1102 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365630</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decisions on the denial of Cenvat Credit due to unregistered service providers and incorrect address on invoices. The matter of credit adjustment under Rule 6(3) was remanded for further verification, and the demand for short payment of Service Tax was set aside. The penalty imposed under Section 76 was not addressed in the judgment, indicating it was not upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365630</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>