<?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 (7) TMI 654 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382958</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the jurisdictional limitation on raising demands beyond five years, directed the quantification of demand under Rule 2A for the relevant period, and affirmed the adjustment of VCES scheme deposits against the appellant&#039;s liability. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected, and both appeals were disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Jul 2019 08:07:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=579208" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 654 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382958</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the jurisdictional limitation on raising demands beyond five years, directed the quantification of demand under Rule 2A for the relevant period, and affirmed the adjustment of VCES scheme deposits against the appellant&#039;s liability. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected, and both appeals were disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>