<?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 (9) TMI 1368 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367632</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD upheld the original order imposing an equal penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, on a cable operator service provider for Service Tax. The appellant&#039;s request for a reduced penalty of 25% was denied due to failure to deposit 25% of the penalty amount within the specified timeframe. The Tribunal relied on a judgment by the Hon&#039;ble Allahabad High Court, emphasizing the importance of timely compliance with penalty payment requirements to qualify for any reduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2018 08:20:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=535578" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1368 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367632</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD upheld the original order imposing an equal penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, on a cable operator service provider for Service Tax. The appellant&#039;s request for a reduced penalty of 25% was denied due to failure to deposit 25% of the penalty amount within the specified timeframe. The Tribunal relied on a judgment by the Hon&#039;ble Allahabad High Court, emphasizing the importance of timely compliance with penalty payment requirements to qualify for any reduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>