<?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 (6) TMI 21 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380944</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision to set aside the demand on the ground of limitation in a case involving alleged short-payment of service tax under Business Auxiliary Services. The Tribunal found no suppression of facts by the assessee to evade tax and dismissed the department&#039;s appeal, emphasizing the importance of proper income disclosure and rejecting the argument of intentional suppression of facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2019 07:53:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=573547" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 21 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380944</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision to set aside the demand on the ground of limitation in a case involving alleged short-payment of service tax under Business Auxiliary Services. The Tribunal found no suppression of facts by the assessee to evade tax and dismissed the department&#039;s appeal, emphasizing the importance of proper income disclosure and rejecting the argument of intentional suppression of facts.</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=380944</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>