<?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 (11) TMI 453 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370110</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the decision of the lower Adjudicating Authority. The appellant, a service provider, had not paid service tax on services provided to clients for the years 2009-10 and 2010-11. The appellant contended that the demand was time-barred as the Show Cause Notice was issued in 2017 for the period between 2009 and 2012. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner (Appeal) did not consider the limitation period, leading to the appeal being allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Nov 2018 08:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541256" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 453 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370110</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the decision of the lower Adjudicating Authority. The appellant, a service provider, had not paid service tax on services provided to clients for the years 2009-10 and 2010-11. The appellant contended that the demand was time-barred as the Show Cause Notice was issued in 2017 for the period between 2009 and 2012. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner (Appeal) did not consider the limitation period, leading to the appeal being allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370110</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>