<?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 1422 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383726</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for service tax and penalties. The Appellants successfully argued that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked due to the department&#039;s awareness of the non-payment of service tax since 2010. The Tribunal emphasized that subsequent show cause notices based on the same facts could not be considered suppression of facts by the assessee. Therefore, the appeal was allowed solely on the point of limitation, providing relief to the Appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jul 2019 06:32:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=581658" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1422 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383726</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for service tax and penalties. The Appellants successfully argued that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked due to the department&#039;s awareness of the non-payment of service tax since 2010. The Tribunal emphasized that subsequent show cause notices based on the same facts could not be considered suppression of facts by the assessee. Therefore, the appeal was allowed solely on the point of limitation, providing relief to the Appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>