<?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>2019 (1) TMI 1305 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374140</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal on limitation grounds, following judicial precedents that emphasized the presence of doubt regarding taxability and the absence of evidence of wilful non-compliance. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable, leading to the appeal&#039;s success on limitation grounds. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the proceedings were held to be hit by limitations, resulting in the appeal being allowed on those grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2019 16:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=555049" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 1305 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374140</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal on limitation grounds, following judicial precedents that emphasized the presence of doubt regarding taxability and the absence of evidence of wilful non-compliance. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable, leading to the appeal&#039;s success on limitation grounds. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the proceedings were held to be hit by limitations, resulting in the appeal being allowed on those grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>