<?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 (2) TMI 1377 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375750</link>
    <description>The Tribunal overturned the order confirming the demand and penalties, citing incorrect quantification of tax liability, early payment by the appellant, and the absence of evidence showing intent to evade tax payment. The appellant&#039;s compliance with registration and payment obligations was considered in the decision to set aside the penalty under Section 78.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2019 07:38:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=559769" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1377 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375750</link>
      <description>The Tribunal overturned the order confirming the demand and penalties, citing incorrect quantification of tax liability, early payment by the appellant, and the absence of evidence showing intent to evade tax payment. The appellant&#039;s compliance with registration and payment obligations was considered in the decision to set aside the penalty under Section 78.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375750</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>