<?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 126 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381049</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order demanding interest and penalty from the appellant. The Tribunal deemed the show cause notice defective for invoking an extended limitation period and failing to specifically mention the relevant statutory provision. As a result, the notice was considered non-maintainable, leading to the ruling in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of specificity in show cause notices for fair opportunity to respond.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2019 08:10:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=573836" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 126 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381049</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order demanding interest and penalty from the appellant. The Tribunal deemed the show cause notice defective for invoking an extended limitation period and failing to specifically mention the relevant statutory provision. As a result, the notice was considered non-maintainable, leading to the ruling in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of specificity in show cause notices for fair opportunity to respond.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>