<?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 (3) TMI 1232 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377211</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the service tax demand of Rs. 2,49,31,259/- with interest for construction services provided to L&amp;amp;T for an On-shore Terminal Project. However, the penalty of the same amount under Section 78 was set aside. Additionally, a penalty of Rs. 1,59,53,404/- under Section 78 was also set aside. The demand of Rs. 45,28,683/- with interest and equal penalty was set aside, partially allowing the appeal. The rejection of a refund claim of Rs. 23,74,026/- was upheld, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. On the other hand, the rejection of a refund claim of Rs. 53,42,006/- was set aside, allowing the appeal with consequential benefits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=564139" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1232 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377211</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the service tax demand of Rs. 2,49,31,259/- with interest for construction services provided to L&amp;amp;T for an On-shore Terminal Project. However, the penalty of the same amount under Section 78 was set aside. Additionally, a penalty of Rs. 1,59,53,404/- under Section 78 was also set aside. The demand of Rs. 45,28,683/- with interest and equal penalty was set aside, partially allowing the appeal. The rejection of a refund claim of Rs. 23,74,026/- was upheld, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. On the other hand, the rejection of a refund claim of Rs. 53,42,006/- was set aside, allowing the appeal with consequential benefits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377211</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>