<?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 (5) TMI 153 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379425</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the appealability of orders by the Designated Authority under the VCES Scheme, following the Punjab &amp;amp; Haryana High Court decision. It also affirmed the consideration of pre-10.05.2013 deposits for calculating the 50% deposit under the VCES Scheme, in line with decisions from various High Courts. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected, and the Commissioner (Appeals) order was upheld, with the cross objection being disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 May 2019 17:29:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=569374" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 153 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379425</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the appealability of orders by the Designated Authority under the VCES Scheme, following the Punjab &amp;amp; Haryana High Court decision. It also affirmed the consideration of pre-10.05.2013 deposits for calculating the 50% deposit under the VCES Scheme, in line with decisions from various High Courts. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected, and the Commissioner (Appeals) order was upheld, with the cross objection being disposed of.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>