<?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 1443 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367707</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of penalties on the appellant for non-cooperation and failure to discharge service tax liability despite registration. The penalties were adjusted based on the genuineness of doubt regarding the obligation to pay service tax. The appeal was rejected, affirming the penalties imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to the appellant&#039;s non-cooperative behavior and failure to provide necessary information to the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2018 08:23:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=535747" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1443 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367707</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of penalties on the appellant for non-cooperation and failure to discharge service tax liability despite registration. The penalties were adjusted based on the genuineness of doubt regarding the obligation to pay service tax. The appeal was rejected, affirming the penalties imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to the appellant&#039;s non-cooperative behavior and failure to provide necessary information to the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367707</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>