<?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>2007 (1) TMI 625 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277243</link>
    <description>The Department&#039;s appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) decision on penalty imposition under the Finance Act, 1994 was rejected. The Commissioner found reasonable grounds for penalty waiver under section 80 and reduced the penalty under section 76 due to lack of evidence of intention to evade tax. The Department failed to justify enhancing the penalty further. The original penalty imposition decision by the Commissioner (Appeals) was affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2018 17:03:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=544654" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 625 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277243</link>
      <description>The Department&#039;s appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) decision on penalty imposition under the Finance Act, 1994 was rejected. The Commissioner found reasonable grounds for penalty waiver under section 80 and reduced the penalty under section 76 due to lack of evidence of intention to evade tax. The Department failed to justify enhancing the penalty further. The original penalty imposition decision by the Commissioner (Appeals) was affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>